[NCUC-DISCUSS] Revised NCUC Statement on Domain Abuse and the Avoidance of Content Regulation

Wendy Seltzer wendy at seltzer.com
Sun Oct 29 14:26:40 CET 2017


I support the statement.

As a secondary point, we might take note of requests to use the mechanisms
of domain suspension for rapid response to content problems: some of which
are content that has technical networked implications, because it
instigates people to do something (like following a link to trigger
fraudulent payments, security risks or DDOS) and others of which are pure
content problems like copyright infringement. Would we ever support a more
rapid response (with potential of remedial process after) in the cases of
technical impact, even though the problem is not the domain name per se?

--Wendy

On Oct 28, 2017 3:57 AM, "Mueller, Milton L" <milton at gatech.edu> wrote:

> I have accepted and rejected various suggestions regarding the Statement.
> Please take a look
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1voPCb3EIi__
> umZ1b2RCwkWhyn9wjnLAkiWdenT1dOKo/edit
>
> One commenter suggested that we make it a NCSG statement not just a NCUC
> statement. That is fine with me, but best to take a two-step process and
> start with NCUC – NPOC can then pass the same statement and it becomes a
> NCSG statement.
>
>
>
> *From:* Ncuc-discuss [mailto:ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 26, 2017 4:14 PM
> *To:* Farell Folly <farellfolly at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* NCUC-discuss <ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Fwd: [call for comment] NCUC Statement on
> Domain Abuse and the Avoidance of Content Regulation
>
>
>
> Dear All,
>
>
>
>    1. Firstly, thank you Milton for drafting the initial draft statement;
>    2. I have incorporated comments within the Draft and also read others
>    comments and draft revisions to the original statement;
>    3. In summary, noting that within ICANN, there has been debate on what
>    constitutes domain abuse and where there are two sides of the fence where
>    on one hand you have people advocating for taking down a domain that has
>    any hint of misbehavior and the other side who feel that Registries and
>    Registrars have no responsibility towards a clean domain space.
>    4. Domain abuse by the most common definition means domains registered
>    for phishing, malware, botnets and domains advertised in spam. Most
>    countries and jurisdictions declare these as illegal and harmful.
>    5. There have been other internet stakeholders that consider other
>    types of domain misuse just as abusive and illegal. Some examples include
>    intellectual property infringement, copyright, trademark violations and
>    certain types of what people may perceive to be objectionable content.
>    6. In my personal opinion, abuse causes well defined harm to many
>    organizations and individuals including Registries and Registrars. Consider
>    the abuse of domain names to commit fraud during times of escalated crisis,
>    where fake red cross domains soliciting donations aside from the spam that
>    exploits one of the Pacific ccTLDs, ".pw" and a host of other "abuse
>    examples"
>    7. In Europe, with domain name abuse related to ".eu", there are ADR
>    Mechanisms aside not prejudicing the rights of EU Nationals to seek redress
>    through the Courts.
>    8. Spam is not less harmful than other forms of abuse since it is used
>    to propagate phishing and malware sites threatening the security and not to
>    mention at great economic cost to countries and to the average end user.
>    Countries from least developed communities (LDCs) are severely impacted
>    cost-wise and access wise.
>    9. The Global Consumer Research 2015 study which looked at 6144
>    consumer responses revealed that 74% highlighted phishing, 79% highlighted
>    spamming and 40% highlighted cybersquatting.
>    10. Whilst from inception, Registries and Registrars traditionally did
>    not include within their contractual obligations to mitigate abuse.
>    11. Calls from the end users and regulators across different
>    jurisdictions have shaped and influenced the evolution and push to bringing
>    more accountability primarily amongst the Registrars and Registries.
>    12. I believe that a key component is reducing the time to harm and
>    removing the domain from the DNS as soon as reasonably possible once it is
>    identified as harmful.
>    13. The 2017 Base Registry Agreement
>    <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/registries/registries-agreements-en>has
>    provisions which say, "Registry Operator *shall take reasonable steps*
>    to *investigate and respond* to any reports from law enforcement and
>    governmental and quasi-governmental agencies of illegal conduct in
>    connection with the use of the TLD.  In responding to such reports,
>    Registry Operator will not be required to take any action in contravention
>    of applicable law".
>    14. In asking ICANN to define "Domain Abuse" we make it the Nexus
>    which we are really trying to avoid when instead we let the community
>    define what is Domain Abuse but what I suggest we do, is that in noting
>    that ICANN is just one player in the entire ecosystem, we push regulation
>    to the fringes whilst encouraging ICANN to continue what it is doing which
>    is to espouse the safe and responsible creation of domains and use of
>    domains.
>    15. These are additional thoughts to comments placed in the Statement
>    that Milton drafted.
>    16. I wish you all well in Abu Dhabi.
>
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Sala
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> Here is a draft NCUC statement on ICANN and content regulation which
> Milton Mueller has penned.
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1voPCb3EIi__
> umZ1b2RCwkWhyn9wjnLAkiWdenT1dOKo
>
>
>
>  According to our timeline for issuing statements, the pen holder drafts
> the statement sent to the list for comments. We will have 24 hours to
> comment on the statement. The penholder or a member of EC will resolve the
> comments and finalize the draft and get it adopted by the majority of the
> NCUC votes.
>
>
>
> If we can adopt the statement we will announce it on Tuesday during our
> constituency day.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Please comment and make suggestions.
>
>
>
> I’ll  see some of you soon in Abu Dhabi.
>
>
>
> Those of you who will participate remotely i will make sure that we will
> keep you engaged in the meetings. If you don’t have time to participate,
> Ill send regular updates to the mailing list.
>
>
>
>
>
> Best
>
> Farzaneh
>
> --
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> @__f_f__
>
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/farellf
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro
>
> Director
>
> Pasifika Nexus
>
> P.O Box 17862
>
> Suva
>
> *FIJI*
>
>
>
> Cell: +679 7656770 <+679%20765%206770>
>
> Tel: +679 3362003 <+679%20336%202003>
>
> E: sala at pasifikanexus.nu
>
> Website: www.pasifikanexus.nu
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20171029/4a878a00/attachment.html>


More information about the Ncuc-discuss mailing list