AW: [NCSG-Discuss] GAC proposal to ban top level domains that use a geographic word unless permission granted from govt (next rounds of gtlds)

[Sam Lanfranco]

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.

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.

Sam L.

-------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!

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.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20141007/64aa2806/attachment.htm>