COICA

[Rafik Dammak]

hi Bill,

for contracted parties, they have pressure from US gov and even had meeting
at White house this week I think
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100929/20293711230/even-without-coica-white-house-asking-registrars-to-voluntarily-censor-infringing-sites.shtml

<http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100929/20293711230/even-without-coica-white-house-asking-registrars-to-voluntarily-censor-infringing-sites.shtml>
Regards

Rafik

2010/9/30 William Drake <william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>

> Hi
>
> Maybe this is something on which NCSG, ALAC, and others in ICANNland should
> weigh in on, e.g. with a letter to Leahy?  It would certainly seem to fall
> within our bailiwick...
>
> Have yet to hear anything from the contracted parties, will be interesting
> to see how they play it…
>
> Bill
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> *From: *William Drake <william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>
> *Date: *September 30, 2010 9:54:54 AM GMT+02:00
> *To: *governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <
> wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
> *Subject: **COICA*
>
> Hi
>
> COICA is an intergalactically horrible idea that seems designed to greatly
> escalate concerns about unilateralism vis. CIR.  As CDT's letter
> http://cdt.org/files/pdfs/Leahy_bill_memo.pdf notes,
>
> "S. 3804 significantly aggravates the situation by suggesting to the world
> that the U.S. does intend to use the historic nature of the DNS (with
> American companies administering “.com” and other leading top-level domains)
> to impose American law on the global Internet. Under the bill, the U.S.
> asserts that it can take down websites created and operated anywhere in the
> world, simply based on the fact that the websites use the most popular
> global top-level domain (.com). This type of assertion of global control is
> the kind of U.S. exercise of power about which other countries of the world
> have worried – and about which U.S. foreign policy has sought to reassure
> the world. Thus S. 3804 directly harms the United Statesʼ Internet
> governance agenda pursued through diplomatic channels over the past ten
> years."
>
> A bit astonishing and sad that the bill was introduced by Patrick Leahy,
> who for many years has been a champion of online civil liberties and partner
> of US public interest groups on digital matters.  But the IPR lobby is a
> powerful beast that apparently must be placated…Still, I'd like to think
> he's going through the motions here and knows this should fail.
>
> Bill
>
>
> On Sep 30, 2010, at 9:37 AM, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:
>
>
> http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/09/open-letter
>
> ____________________________________________________________
>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>
>    governance at lists.cpsr.org
>
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>
>    governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
>
> For all list information and functions, see:
>
>    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
> ***********************************************************
> William J. Drake
> Senior Associate
> Centre for International Governance
> Graduate Institute of International and
> Development Studies
> Geneva, Switzerland
> william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
> www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
> www.linkedin.com/in/williamjdrake
> ***********************************************************
>
>
>
>  ***********************************************************
> William J. Drake
> Senior Associate
> Centre for International Governance
> Graduate Institute of International and
>  Development Studies
> Geneva, Switzerland
> william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
> www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
> www.linkedin.com/in/williamjdrake
> ***********************************************************
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20101002/da92fd5a/attachment.html>