<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
+1 for the draft proposal, including the amendments.<br>
<br>
Norbert Klein<br>
Cambodia<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/13/2016 10:51 PM, farzaneh badii
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAN1qJvB6JX1r1a=6upw9iFAcygEOZL5o29_X6STafSrz7LgKaA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<p dir="ltr">Thanks Stefania. For sure you can make changes
directly on the Google doc. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Best</p>
<p dir="ltr">Farzaneh </p>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 13 Aug 2016 5:49 p.m., "Milan,
Stefania" <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Stefania.Milan@eui.eu">Stefania.Milan@eui.eu</a>>
wrote:<br type="attribution">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Dear Farzi<br>
thanks much for taking the time to draft this public
comment. I find Ed's suggestions to the point--thanks for
including them.<br>
May I suggest some change in the wording of the first
paragraph, in the google doc?<br>
As a member of the NCSG PC, I hope this gets to out table
:-)<br>
Thanks again!<br>
Best, Stefania<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>__________<br>
Da: NCSG-Discuss <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a><wbr>>
per conto di farzaneh badii <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:farzaneh.badii@GMAIL.COM">farzaneh.badii@GMAIL.COM</a>><br>
Inviato: sabato 13 agosto 2016 17.27.55<br>
A: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a><br>
Oggetto: Re: Public comments on country codes and second
level top level domains<br>
<br>
Hi<br>
<br>
Added the changes recommended by Ed. Thank you very much.<br>
<br>
Farzaneh<br>
<br>
On 13 Aug 2016 4:59 p.m., "farzaneh badii" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:farzaneh.badii@gmail.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:farzaneh.badii@gmail.com">farzaneh.badii@gmail.com</a></a><<wbr>mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:farzaneh.badii@gmail.com">farzaneh.badii@gmail.<wbr>com</a>>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
Yes I agree and will implement Eds Suggestion soon .<br>
<br>
On 13 Aug 2016 4:54 p.m., "Sam Lanfranco" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:lanfran@yorku.ca"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:lanfran@yorku.ca">lanfran@yorku.ca</a></a><mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:lanfran@yorku.ca">lanfr<wbr><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:an@yorku.ca">an@yorku.ca</a></a>>>
wrote:<br>
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>
On 8/13/2016 8:14 AM, Edward Morris wrote:<br>
Hi Farzi,<br>
<br>
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:<br>
<br>
---<br>
<br>
REGISTRATION POLICY<br>
<br>
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.<br>
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.<br>
<br>
---<br>
<br>
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?<br>
<br>
With that small exception I fully endorse this comment. I
look forward to hearing what others have to say.<br>
<br>
Thanks again, Frazi, for your hard work on this.<br>
<br>
Kind Regards,<br>
<br>
Ed Morris<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
confidential and/or privileged material. Any review,
retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or
other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this
information by persons or entities other than the intended
recipient is prohibited without the express permission of
the sender. If you received this communication in error,
please contact the sender and delete the material from any
computer.<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>