for Debbie: Explaining votes made while representing NCSG while on GNSO Council

[Alain Berranger]

Thanks Kerry,

I stand corrected... Just wanted to share the Globe & Mail space on this
issue. Also, I'm with you on opposing the current government on where it is
trying to take our country.

Best, Alain

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Kerry Brown <kerry at kdbsystems.com> wrote:

> I'm Canadian and I don't consider this a Canadian overview. It is an
> interview with an author. I haven't read the book but from the author's
> answers to the interview questions it seems like much of it is based on
> hearsay. Personally I prefer to be thought of as innocent until proven
> guilty. I realise not all countries base their laws on this premise. I also
> realise that law enforcement agencies may need the power to invade privacy
> while investigating a crime. Canadian law, which is based on the innocent
> until proven guilty paradigm, provides for search warrants and other legal
> means for law enforcement agencies to do this. I would not want to see that
> change in Canada. The current Canadian government is working to change this.
> Many Canadians are arguing against this change thus I don't think the
> article is a fair representation of a Canadian overview.
>
> Kerry Brown
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of
> Alain Berranger
> Sent: October-20-11 8:45 AM
> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] for Debbie: Explaining votes made while
> representing NCSG while on GNSO Council
>
> Thanks Milton,
>
> Yes, but the reverse is true also: while suspected cyber criminals are
> given the presumption of innocence during the unavoidable due diligence
> process, innocent victims are or may have been damaged !... sometimes that
> damage is "irréparable" or permanent!..given the interconnectedness nature
> of the internet, much if not most cybercrime is cross-border...in fact
> criminal schemes are most often designed around cross-border faults or
> gaps... between countries with opposing ends of the privacy-law enforcement
> spectrum...  They are a few rogue states today where due diligence and lack
> of inter-agency collaboration leave no doubt with most about the protection
> cybercriminals get from rogue politicians, to their mutual benefit... We
> should use available international law enforcement approaches against the
> obvious and evidence-based crimes in those cases... I refrain from naming
> countries for obvious reasons...
>
> See
> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/exploring-the-growing-threat-of-cyber-crime/article2205621/ for
> a Canadian overview...
>
> What chagrines me to no end is that cybercrime benefits are "fungeable" and
> contribute to other cross-border crimes like human trafficking, child
> pornography,...
>
> Alain
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
> Alain,
> The problem is rarely one of deciding how much privacy a criminal should
> have. Most often, the problem is determining whether the person being taken
> down, disrupted or exposed IS IN FACT A CRIMINAL. That's the problem
> typically with conservative approaches to law enforcement: they assume that
> we already know who is guilty, and structure their procedures accordingly.
> But the procedures are in place to protect the innocent, and to make sure(r)
> that we actually have strong reason to believe that the person being
> affected is a wrongdoer and not an innocent bystander.
>
> From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of
> Alain Berranger
> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 3:44 PM
> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] for Debbie: Explaining votes made while
> representing NCSG while on GNSO Council
>
> Can we all agree that there is malfeasance on the Web and that it should be
> brought down as often and as much as possible? The raft of cybersecurity
> legislation around the world's legislations is probably a confirmation of
> the seriousness and extent of the problem. However it is accepted widely
> that we must strike a balance between fighting cybercrime and ensuring data
> protection/privacy. How much privacy should a criminal have in the
> accomplishment of the crime?... so whatever our personal views on
> that, please let's allow for all positions along that spectrum and allow for
> debate.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
> Member, Board of Directors, CECI, http://www.ceci.ca
> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca
> Trustee, GKP Foundation, www.globalknowledgepartnership.org
> Vice Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
> O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
> Skype: alain.berranger
>



-- 
Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
Member, Board of Directors, CECI,
http://www.ceci.ca<http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>
Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca
Trustee, GKP Foundation, www.globalknowledgepartnership.org
Vice Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
Skype: alain.berranger
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20111020/d568cf37/attachment-0001.html>