[NCUC-DISCUSS] Session on termination of domains for hate speech at ICANN 60

Mon Aug 21 07:02:54 CEST 2017

Hi everyone,

Allow me to weigh in as well. I think this is a topic worth discussing, but
I also appreciate James' dissent. May I suggest that Jeremy, you and any
members that support this session draw up a very, very rough outline of a
possible agenda and present it? Perhaps then we could decide on the most
appropriate venue and the precise topics to discuss (as well as any
intended outcomes – i.e., if it's meant to be mainly informational, that
might influence the space it is hosted).

Best,
-Michael

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 4:07 AM, Martin Pablo Silva Valent <
mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
> James, I think that your point of view is exactly why we need to discuss
> it, even if it is to say: we have nothing to say here. Because enforcing
> TOS is ICANN business when those TOS are always within the frame of the
> agreement those companies sing with ICANN. The ICANN agreement tells them
> what they can, can’t or must do. Even if we agree that the current ICANN
> legal framework of those agreement allows that behavior, it will always be
> open to the question ¿do we want that? Because ICANN agreements have the
> power to change future TOS to say the least.
> Maybe the answer to all of this concerns are just like you say, ICANN has
> no business in this issue, go and fight it somewhere else, weather it is a
> US, UK or Argentina Court depending on each activist or right’s owner forum
> shopping strategy, but stay away of ICANN (I am really not stating a
> position on the subject in this email).
> So short story: We need to have this discussion, even if it is to say is
> not our discussion in the end. And I think this belongs to both GNSO and
> the HHRR with their own different perspectives, scopes, members, etc. I
> wouldn’t even be surprised if other stakeholders, SO/AC or Working Groups
> talk about this issue formally or informally. The subject deserves more
> than a few emails, even if we reject it is is better to have it rejected
> after a fair disunion when the community has a fair, maybe wrong, desire to
> discuss it.
>
> Cheers,
> Martín
>
> On Aug 20, 2017, at 10:47 PM, Gustavo Paiva <gdp.direito at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> "I understand James's concern for scope, just like Bill I don't yet know
> what to think either, but it seems that Ayden's line that DNS, as a
> technical framework, "is being used to determine who can and cannot
> disseminate knowledge and opinions" is absolutely enough for us to put this
> discussion forward for the time being."
>
> I find that Claudio Lucena's words represent my view on this matter, and
> in particular I think this is a subject that deserves debate. I am not
> experienced with ICANN meetings so I have no opinion on that matter, but I
> think a civilized, productive debate, with both sides being represented,
> could be performed at the Brazilian IGF.
>
> Gustavo Paiva.
>
> On 20 August 2017 at 16:37, Stephanie Perrin <
> stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:
>
>> I agree, let's not escalate things  ourselves.  I think the CEO of
>> Cloudfare has expressed it quite well: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/1
>> 7/cloudflare-ceo-says-removing-the-daily-stormer-is-slippery-slope.html.
>> I think we should have this discussion, am neutral as to the appropriate
>> setting.  I bet Michael Nelson from Cloudfare will be there, he would be
>> good to talk to as a discussant of the matter.
>> Stephanie Perrin
>> On 2017-08-20 12:36, Niels ten Oever wrote:
>>
>> That escalated quickly. I don't think the statement by EFF is
>> interpreted that way. Am a bit surprised that people would base their
>> decisions on how a fringe group portrays them.
>>
>> For some more reading on the issue a selection of articles from Berkman:
>> https://cyber.harvard.edu/publications/2017/08/harmfulspeech
>>
>> On 08/20/2017 06:29 PM, James Gannon wrote:
>>
>> Be very careful here guys, the minute that this session is rebranded
>> as why the NCUC thinks that Nazis should have been left online, which
>> is exactly how this session will be branded by the alt-right, is the
>> minute you will see half of your membership resign, myself included.
>>
>> -James
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Ncuc-discuss
>> [mailto:ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org <ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org>] On Behalf Of Kathy
>> Kleiman Sent: 20 August 2017 17:06 To: ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>> Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Session on termination of domains for
>> hate speech at ICANN 60
>>
>> That's great, Niels, but I think it is also a very important session
>> for NCUC to have as well (NCUC and/or NCSG).  There are a range of
>> pending policy issues -- in ICANN and just outside of ICANN -- that
>> we need not only to discuss, but to start formulating plans and
>> strategies.
>>
>> Termination of domain names -- via lack of due process, private
>> copyright law and private trademark law -- are all very much issues
>> that the Noncommercial Community needs to be ready for in statements,
>> comments and positions to come.  The more we work on this issue the
>> better.
>>
>> BTW, these are issues -- especially termination of domain names
>> without due process -- that go back to the very founding of the NCUC
>> and our earliest work on the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy
>> (UDRP) which was "consensus policy #1" in ICANN. We fought for a
>> policy grounded in intellectual property laws **and legal protections
>> for free expression and due process.** With so many similar issues
>> now on the table, this is our NCUC moment to continue to serve as the
>> conscience of ICANN.
>>
>> Best, Kathy
>>
>>
>> On 8/20/2017 3:36 AM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Perhaps we can probably make some time in the CCWP HR / human
>> rights session for this? Would that work for people?
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Niels
>>
>> On 08/19/2017 02:16 PM, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> In case it is helpful, please find attached the preliminary block
>>  schedule for ICANN 60.
>>
>> It is really a shame we cannot have this discussion as a
>> cross-community High Interest Topic at ICANN 60. I think that
>> would be the best place for this dialogue to take place.
>> Nonetheless, I count myself among those who would welcome this
>> conversation taking place on Constituency Day.
>>
>> And Jeremy, thanks for sharing that excellent statement on
>> content removal and noting what a blunt instrument the suspension
>> of a domain name is. Freedom of expression is a fundamental human
>> right. You don't take human rights away from people just because
>> you hate them or their views. It's kind of shocking to me how
>> quickly some have been to throw these fundamental principles of
>> liberalism into the bonfire.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Ayden Férdeline linkedin.com/in/ferdeline<http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>
>>  -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS]
>> Session on termination of domains for hate speech at ICANN 60
>> Local Time: 19 August 2017 3:49 AM UTC Time: 19 August 2017
>> 02:49 From: dave at davecake.net To: Jeremy Malcolm<jmalcolm at eff.org> <jmalcolm at eff.org> ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>
>> I would support this discussion taking place. I find the NCSG
>> agenda is usually a bit more open, and NCUC agenda often pretty
>> packed.
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>> On 18 Aug 2017, at 7:48 am, Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org
>>  <mailto:jmalcolm at eff.org> <jmalcolm at eff.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> EFF has just posted its thoughts on the GoDaddy and Google
>> termination of the Daily Stormer's domain:
>> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/08/fighting-neo-nazis-future-fre
>>
>>  e-expression
>>
>> This would be a timely topic to address in more detail at
>> ICANN 60. I will be attending and would like to be able to
>> find some time to talk about this and also about the recent
>> EFF and Public Knowledge whitepaper "Which Internet
>> registries offer the best protection for domain owners? <https://www.eff.org/wp/which-internet-registries-offer-best-protection-domain-owners> <https://www.eff.org/wp/which-internet-registries-offer-best-protection-domain-owners>".
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> What are the avenues for holding such a presentation?  Is there
>>
>> already a block of time for NCSG where this would fit in, or
>> should a separate session be requested?  If so can anyone
>> point me to the information about how to do this?  Sorry, I'm
>> a little behind on the logistics of ICANN meetings because I
>> seldom attend in person.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> -- Jeremy Malcolm Senior Global Policy Analyst Electronic
>> Frontier Foundation https://eff.org jmalcolm at eff.org
>>
>> Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161 <(415)%20436-9333>
>>
>> :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
>>
>> Public key:https://www.eff.org/files/2016/11/27/key_jmalcolm.txt PGP
>> fingerprint: 75D2 4C0D 35EA EA2F 8CA8 8F79 4911 EC4A EDDF
>> 1122 _______________________________________________
>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org<mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org> <Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
>> _______________________________________________ Ncuc-discuss
>> mailing list Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
>> _______________________________________________ Ncuc-discuss mailing
>> list Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>> _______________________________________________ Ncuc-discuss mailing
>> list Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20170821/816d05fe/attachment.html>