[Poll] reminder: Topics for discussion: NCSG - ICANN Board meeting Tuesday 9th February

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

Aren't various government and intergovernmental actions forcing ICANN to
take action based on content.  Unfortunately we keep saying they have no
business discussing content based issue, yet, others impose these issues
on ICANN.  How do we give the Board and Staff  guidance, recommendations
and advice on how to handle the contents tissue imposed on ICANN without
dealing with it?

avri

On 25-Jan-15 20:33, Edward Morris wrote:
>
> Hi Rafik,
>
>  
>
> I’d like to suggest a topic that has not had high visibility in our
> stakeholder group in recent years, yet is a big part of the NCSG DNA:
> the belief that ICANN should not be involved in content control. It’s
> part of our belief in free expression and it’s something that very
> slowly ICANN is getting involved in fairly blatantly. I think it would
> be productive for us to raise the flag in this area to get word to the
> Board that we’re noticing this and that we do not approve of this
> mission creep.
>
>  
>
> ICANN has always been involved in content to some degree. The most
> visible activity in this area came during the .XXX battles where
> contractual language specified forms of prohibited content. Obviously
> the new gTLD programme involves, in many ways, content classification.
> But recently…
>
>  
>
> This autumn we learned that ICANN had employees going through
> corporate records of firms in Panama to help law enforcement track
> down an alleged child pornography ring. (
> http://domainincite.com/14842-icann-helps-bust-russian-child-porn-ring
> ). Now Fadi tells us they are attempting to figure out what to do with
> the case of a Bulgarian man with servers in Costa Rica who is
> allegedly putting i.p. ingringing content online ( NCSG – CEO meeting,
> NCPH intersessional transcript, p. 19-20). This is certainly a long
> way from names and numbers.
>
>  
>
> We know Fadi’s perspective. According to Mr. Chehade, ICANN is under
> pressure. It’s one of the reasons ICANN is supposedly getting involved
> in the NMI. Yet during the interessional meeting Fadi also stated
> several times that ICANN needed community input to help determine “how
> far does ICANN want to go?” on matters like these (intersessional
> transcript, p. 10). We need to tell him that ICANN has no role to play
> in policing content online.
>
>  
>
> Although we know Fadi’s position (both revelations mentioned above
> came as a result of Fadi speaking extemporaneously) and expressed
> confusion on these matters  we haven’t really heard from the Board
> about situations like these. On the one hand we’re told during the
> transition that ICANN has a limited remit and is going to stick to it.
> On the other hand we have ICANN employees searching through Central
> American corporate records to assist authorities in policing content.
> I think it would be appropriate for us to express concern about
> ICANN’s incursions, both actual and contemplated, into content and to
> try to get clarification as to the Board’s views and intentions on the
> matter.
>
>  
>
> Ed 
>
> ᐧ
>
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com
> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi everyone,
>
>     We need to get 3 topics to discuss with the ICANN board at
>     singapore meeting.
>
>     Best, 
>
>     Rafik
>
>     On Jan 20, 2015 10:32 AM, "Rafik Dammak" <rafik.dammak at gmail.com
>     <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         Hi everyone,
>
>         like every time in preparation for ICANN meeting, we have to
>         discuss what kind of topics/issues we want to raise with ICANN
>         board members when we  meet them.
>
>         we will try to get 3 topics and send them 1 week prior to the
>         session. 
>         please propose  topics and suggest short descriptions . we
>         will conduct later a polling to pick-up the 3 topics among the
>         proposals.
>
>         Best Regards,
>
>         Rafik
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20150126/c34832ca/attachment.htm>