[NCUC-DISCUSS] Revised NCUC Statement on Domain Abuse and the Avoidance of Content Regulation
Cláudio Lucena
claudiokilla at gmail.com
Mon Oct 30 09:49:01 CET 2017
Interesting point. I believe to some extent it was dealt with on Sunday
with the SSAC, and that for now the expression "such as domains that
facilitate fraud and exploit confusion" is enough for us to give eventual
support to measures that need to be adopted to tackle content with indirect
technical impact. If anything, these should be exceptions, never rules.
Claudio
2017-10-29 10:26 GMT-03:00 Wendy Seltzer <wendy at seltzer.com>:
> 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__umZ1b2RCwkWhy
>> n9wjnLAkiWdenT1dOKo/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__umZ1b2RCwkWhy
>> n9wjnLAkiWdenT1dOKo
>>
>>
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20171030/4208b64f/attachment.html>
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list