<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
While I understand Milton's argument here, I cannot support his
conclusion. There are complicated Internet ecosystem issues
unfolding around geoTLDs and the issues will not go away. Few of
them have anything to do with censorship or the freedom of
expression. They will get confronted and dealt with (well or badly)
in various global venues (UN, ITU, new/old multilateral agreements,
old/new multistakeholder processes). Constituencies within ICANN are
also concerned with these geoTLD issues. The more open, inclusive
and transparent discussion is the greater the possibility of good
policies, including areas where "do noting" is the best policy. <br>
<br>
Within that dialogue ICANN itself is a constituent stakeholder. Like
any other stakeholder, it can refrain from engagement in the broader
process, remain outside the discussion, and even refrain from
looking at its existing role in the issues (here resulting from the
various classes of ICANN authorized TLDs: city, brand, geo, etc.).
However, I don't see refraining from engagement as a strategy.
Standing with one's back to a growing fire is neither a defensive
nor a proactive strategy. It just means getting burned with little
warning and little preparedness. <br>
<br>
Sam L.<br>
<pre wrap=""><font color="#330099">-------Quoting Milton Mueller:-------
ICANN is obliged to respect only those national laws that apply to what it does in national jurisdictions. Laws are limited in scope to their jurisdiction - have we forgotten that? Since the domain name space is global, no national laws can or should regulate it. E.g., a ban or regulation on the use of the word 'Peru' made by the government of Peru cannot regulate what I do with my URLs, computer names, or domains in the USA - even if it is visible in Peru!
</font></pre>
<pre wrap=""><font color="#330099">The alternative is to do nothing. Which is better. If real laws apply, apply them to what happens, using normal due process and limited jurisdictions. No need for ICANN to legislate expression on a global level. And please do not tell me that speech restrictions are fine if they are done by a multistakeholder organization. As I have frequently said, I don' give a damn if the person censoring me is Vladimir Putin or a multistakeholder working group led by Wolfgang, it's still censorship.
</font></pre>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>