More on USG and ICANN (also: GAC meeting in Brussels)

[Alex Gakuru]

Hi,

I have circulated it to African mailing lists.

regards,

Alex

On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 1:37 AM, Mary Wong <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> wrote:

>  Hi everyone
>
> Attached is a revised version of the proposed NCSG statement on the US
> Government proposal that will no doubt be discussed in Brussels. I've
> incorporated all Milton's edits except for a couple of minor language tweaks
> and edits.
>
> Who and what should we send it to? The story's been picked up by quite a
> few blogs and other publications (such as Milton's piece on CBS, Declan
> McCullagh's and Kieran McCarthy's write ups etc.) so it seems to me that
> NCSG can use the opportunity to support the Board doing the right thing.
>
> I guess we could send to the "usual suspects" like Circle ID, Managing IP,
> the folks mentioned here and perhaps the Internet Governance Caucus list,
> besides individuals and individual lists we may belong to. Any other ideas?
> Or would members prefer a less public approach?
>
> Cheers
> Mary
>
>
>  *Mary W S Wong*
> *Professor of Law*
> *Chair, Graduate IP Programs*
> UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW Two White Street Concord, NH
> 03301 USA Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage:
> http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on
> the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at:
> http://ssrn.com/author=437584>>>
>     *From: * Milton L Mueller <mueller at SYR.EDU> *To:* <
> NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu> *Date: * 2/7/2011 2:26 PM *Subject: * Re:
> More on USG and ICANN
>
> Mary
>
> Thanks for the initial good work. I’ve gone over it, deleted some things,
> modified wording mainly on the GAC censorship issue, and added a short
> section on Vertical integration.
>
> As I understand it, you are addressing this statement to the GAC members.
> For this to be worthwhile, we must have a means of distributing this to GAC
> members. What is your proposed method? I don’t know for sure how to do it.
>
> On the GAC veto, I have strengthened the language considerably. Please do
> not fall into the trap of voicing support for “universal resolvability,” as
> if a GAC veto were actually some kind of a remedy for national-level
> blocking. Here is my substitute language:
>
> “We wish to emphasize that an appeal to “universal resolvability of DNS”
> cannot possibly justify giving any individual government the power to block
> the creation of a TLD “for any reason.” One does not advance the cause of a
> globally interconnected internet by encouraging any individual government to
> exercise a global authority to block the creation of top level domain
> applications. The only effect of such a policy would be to multiply one
> country’s controls and regulations to all countries. There are in fact no
> technical harms to the Internet as a whole caused by the blocking of a
> single TLD by one or a few countries.”
>
> I also deleted your list of “misapprehensions” – first, what you are doing
> there is re-stating USG’s arguments and anyone reading it hurriedly (as
> almost all will) can easily come away with the misapprehension that you are
> supporting those arguments. Second, it’s too wordy and assumes too careful a
> reading  - you are telling the reader what arguments you will reject
> hundreds of words later, and it’s unlikely people will read the doc with
> that level of care, best to just attack the arguments when you attack them.
>
> Edited file is attached
>
>
>
> *From:* Mary Wong [mailto:Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu]
> *Sent:* Monday, February 07, 2011 12:30 PM
> *To:* NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu; Milton L Mueller
> *Subject:* Re: More on USG and ICANN
>
>
>
> Thanks to Milton and Marc for the links. I decided to sit down and read the
> US Government proposal in greater detail than I have, and as a result
> produced a draft statement for NCSG that I hope you will all sign on to and
> that we can circulate widely to facilitate the ICANN Board sticking to only
> narrow changes/revisions to the draft Applicant Guidebook by San Francisco.
> I'm thinking, in particular, of Board members, GAC friendlies, and
> influential publications/blogs/journalists).
>
>
>
> Please note that I've only had time (and background) to write about the
> proposals relating to the MAPO and Community Objections Procedure, and
> briefly on the trademark stuff. If anybody wants to add comments on the
> other proposals (e.g. VI, economic analysis), please feel free do so but -
> hopefully - soon.
>
>
>
> In the same vein, and assuming this makes it as an NCSG comment, I think
> it'd be good to circulate it sooner rather than later. As such - and mind
> you, I'm not possessive about my language! - please limit your comments to
> substantive ones as far as possible. I know my phrasing is likely to be
> viewed as too tame by some members, but I won't have time to do a re-write
> (nor would I necessarily support a much more impassioned document :)
>
>
>
> Finally, I wanted to note that I don't mention one issue of significance to
> NCSG - support for developing country applicants (which is what the JAS
> working group headed by Rafik is working on in the face of massive
> difficulties and opposition within the ICANN community). It may be that this
> issue is major enough for some NCSG members to support a delayed launch of
> new gTLDs, but I felt it would not be opportune or strategic to include it
> in the document (I do, however, sneak in a footnote linking to Milton's blog
> post about the topic :)
>
>
>
> Please let the list know if you have substantive comments, position
> corrections or are working on a draft or re-draft (so we can keep track of
> who's doing what). I also apologize if there are members other than Milton
> and Avri who have blogged about the issue who I didn't know about and so
> didn't use to help draft this document.
>
>
>
> Thanks and cheers
>
> Mary
>
>
>
> *Mary W S Wong*
>
> *Professor of Law*
>
> *Chair, Graduate IP Programs*
> UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW Two White Street Concord, NH
> 03301 USA Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage:
> http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on
> the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at:
> http://ssrn.com/author=437584
>
> >>>
>
> *From: *
>
> Milton L Mueller <mueller at SYR.EDU>
>
> *To:*
>
> <NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>
> *Date: *
>
> 2/7/2011 11:33 AM
>
> *Subject: *
>
> Re: More on USG and ICANN
>
> Ars Technica has also taken up the issue
>
> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/02/if-governments-can-block-top-level-domains-is-gay-doomed.ars
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Marc Rotenberg [mailto:rotenberg at epic.org]
> > Sent: Monday, February 07, 2011 7:47 AM
> > To: Milton L Mueller
> > Cc: NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> > Subject: More on USG and ICANN
> >
> > http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20030809-281.html
> >
> > Marc.
>
>
>
>
>
> As of August 30, 2010, Franklin Pierce Law Center has affiliated with the
> University of New Hampshire and is now known as the *University of New
> Hampshire School of Law.* Please note that all email addresses have
> changed and now follow the convention: firstname.lastname at law.unh.edu. For
> more information on the *University of New Hampshire School of Law*, please
> visit *law.unh.edu*
>
>
>  As of August 30, 2010, Franklin Pierce Law Center has affiliated with the
> University of New Hampshire and is now known as the *University of New
> Hampshire School of Law.* Please note that all email addresses have
> changed and now follow the convention: firstname.lastname at law.unh.edu. For
> more information on the *University of New Hampshire School of Law*, please
> visit *law.unh.edu*
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20110209/1717298a/attachment-0001.html>