question to the candiates

[Martin Pablo Silva Valent]

Niels,
	I have to say that Ayden’s english skills, which are far beyond the regular native speaker, put it very elegantly and make me wanna agree with his statement rather that repeat it in another, more poor, wording, but since two heads are better than one:
	I think ICANN at some extent or interpretation has a concerns for public safety, but only in the very narrow scope it concerns the critical resource it manages, a very narrow interpretation of “public safety” as Ayden said: stability, security and resilience (of the DNS itself). I do not agree with the role of ICANN going after other public safety interpretations, like being the police of content or being the responsible to act upon other's public safety concerns. 	
	Even the bare concepto of “public safety” is imposible to define in this context, each nation and stakeholder, I would even say actor, would want a different interpretation and it is a very obvios slippery slope to make ICANN do things that god beyond it’s mission.
	I do think that ICANN has the concern and duty to, at some extent, work with law enforcement and other public safety agencies, even civil society or multilateral ones, to make them fully aware and knowledgeable about how DNS works, but in no case I think ICANN should have mechanisms that allow public safety as a key or exception to overpass all other policy. Not because I think DNS is more important than public safety, I don’t have a Tech Fetiche on DNS, but I do think that such and open concept with such powerful actors going after it can create a very serious risk of breaking ICANN and the DNS in the process.
	Even the “easy” with a lot of “ “, like child protection, natural disaster, health issues, financial crisis, war and humanitarian disasters, are problematic and create a bigger risk of putting in danger all the other things we also believe are crucial to today’s, and future society about how internet works. 
	In the end, I think, and I see that every day as a Lawyer, that the protection of Public Safety already has all sort of entities and tools to pursue that mission. An even when ICANN can help them navigate the DNS, it is not responsable to alter or administrate the DNS to become another public safety agencie.

I hope that at least puts me in the map on the issue.

Cheers to all,
Martín Silva



> On Aug 22, 2017, at 8:34 AM, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Niels,
> 
> Thanks for this question. 
> 
> It is important to me that ICANN acts only in accordance with its bylaws.
> 
> So, I believe ICANN has a public responsibility to ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet’s system of unique identifiers.
> 
> I believe ICANN has a public responsibility to allocate new gTLDs in a transparent and equitable manner.
> 
> Similarly, I believe ICANN has a role to play in ensuring there is consumer choice and effective competition.
> 
> And its policies must be fair, respecting fundamental rights, including the rights to privacy and freedom of expression.
> 
> I do not support any mission creep that would see ICANN venture into content regulation, as the use of a domain name is outside of ICANN’s remit.
> 
> I hope this is helpful in understanding where I fall on this issue. I would be happy to respond to any other questions, or to clarify my remarks, if necessary.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Ayden Férdeline 
> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
> 
> 
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 9:04 pm, Niels ten Oever <lists at DIGITALDISSIDENTS.ORG <mailto:lists at DIGITALDISSIDENTS.ORG>> wrote:
>> Dear candidates, Would you be so kind to tell us what you think ICANN's role is vis a vis public safety? Thanks in advance, Niels -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20170823/350d7dbf/attachment.htm>