<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">I would like to second Ed's concern
here. I went to the full list of gTLDs and spend some time playing
around with placing two letter country codes in front of gTLDs and
could hardly find anything that would look suspiciously like a
government site. Misrepresentation would flow not from the
two-letter/gTLD URL itself, but from the use of the domain name.
Leave registries and registrar's out of enforcement there, and
leave it where it belongs, with initiative taken by offended
parties (including governments), or by those abused by
misrepresentation. <br>
<br>
Sam L. <br>
<br>
<i>On 8/13/2016 8:14 AM, Edward Morris wrote:</i><i><br>
</i></div>
<blockquote cite="mid:c5c9383eca1743eaa832b4c642431c19@toast.net"
type="cite"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica,
Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">
<div><i>Hi Farzi,</i></div>
<i>
</i>
<div><i> </i></div>
<i>
</i>
<div><i>Thanks so much for doing this. Clearly this is an issue
directly related to free speech on the domain name line and
I certainly support the NCSG submitting a public comment on
this matter. I also agree with your approach to the issue,
except for one small part. You write:</i></div>
<i>
</i>
<div><i> </i></div>
<i>
</i>
<div><i>---</i></div>
<i>
</i>
<div><i> </i></div>
<i>
</i>
<div>
<div><em>REGISTRATION POLICY</em></div>
<div> </div>
<div><em>This policy requires the registry to make sure that
the registrant has taken measures to ensure against
misrepresenting or falsely implying that the registrant or
its business is affiliated with the government.</em></div>
<div><em>We find this acceptable, however misrepresentation
should be interpreted narrowly. But the obligation that
the registrant not to falsely imply that it is affiliated
with the government is a sound approach which we support. </em></div>
<div> </div>
<div>---</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I don't want registry's to turn into content police or
judges of the intent of registrants. I recognise there is a
big push in ICANN, from the IPC, the GAC and others, to turn
Registries into de facto enforcement bodies. I think this is
something we should resist at any and every opportunity.
What are the criteria to be used concerning government
affiliation? Is this something we really want Registries to
decide?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>With that small exception I fully endorse this comment. I
look forward to hearing what others have to say.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thanks again, Frazi, for your hard work on this.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Kind Regards,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Ed Morris </div>
</div>
<i>
</i>
<div><i> </i></div>
<i>
</i>
<div style="-webkit-touch-callout: none; -webkit-user-select:
none; -khtml-user-select: none;-moz-user-select:
none;-ms-user-select: none;-o-user-select: none;user-select:
none;"> </div>
<i></i></span></blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>