NCSG discussion of DNS and Content Regulation (Tues)

[Kathy Kleiman]

Hi All,
A strong statement is a good first step, but more is needed. Incursions 
into our speech and expression are taking place throughout the New 
gTLDs. To talk more about the issues, concerns, examples and trends, 
please join us at the start of the NCSG session on Tuesday for:
*
DNS AND CONTENT REGULATION
**Tues, 3:15pm (local time); 7:15am Eastern
**In person: Capital Suite 07
**Remote participation: Adobe Connect 
https://participate.icann.org/abu60-capitalsuite7
*
This will be a discussion, so please bring examples, issues/concerns of 
what you are seeing in the New gTLDs.
Best, Kathy
p.s. I'll be leading by remote participation, so special outreach to all 
who want to participate remotely!


On 10/29/2017 7:35 PM, Sam Lanfranco wrote:
> All,
>
> From the beginning there has always been what amounts to a strict 
> demarcation, to distinguish between "domain name abuse" and "content 
> regulation". ICANN, by the very nature of its mandate and its remit, 
> must steer clear of "content regulation". This does not downplay the 
> difficult and complex issues around content on the Internet, and 
> around efforts at content regulation, but it underscores the simple 
> fact that ICANN is not in the business of content regulation, and 
> will/should never venture into that area.
>
> There are ample other policy venues in which to address the complex 
> and thorny issues surrounding content regulation. Many of us are 
> involved in those venues as well, as venues with a distinct remit in 
> their own right. I join others in endorsing the proposed statement and 
> find nothing in the wording that I take issue with.
>
> Sam Lanfranco (ncsg/npoc)
>
> /On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Mueller, Milton L 
> <milton at gatech.edu <mailto:milton at gatech.edu>> wrote:
> Dear NCSG members:
>
> In the next email I will send a proposed statement about domain abuse. 
> Those
> of you involved with NCUC will recognize it, it has been circulated on the
> NCUC list and discussed extensively there.
>
> We would also like to get the endorsement of NCSG as a whole for this
> statement. So I send it to the NCSG list for you to review./
>
> --------
>
> *Proposed statement on domain abuse and content regulation*
>
> As civil society stakeholders concerned about individual rights and 
> freedom
> of expression on the Internet, we think it is important to maintain a 
> clear
> distinction between illegal content and domain name abuse. We wish to
> clarify and reaffirm ICANN’s limited mission.
>
> Domain abuse involves cases in which the domain itself is causing 
> problems,
> such as domains that facilitate fraud and exploit confusion, support
> phishing via confusing or deceptive strings, or domains that support 
> botnet
> command and control operations.
>
> We are concerned that the concept of “domain abuse” is being stretched to
> include various forms of allegedly “illegal” or “undesirable” content on
> webpages, listservs and email addresses associated with domain names. This
> includes the use of domain names for political speech, personal expression
> and competitive discussions. An overly-broad definition of “domain abuse”
> would require ICANN to enter the realm of decision-maker or judge on 
> whether
> the webpage was a copyright-infringement or fair use, involved legal 
> use of
> a trademark to criticize a company’s products or practices or trademark
> infringement, and whether hate speech, whose definition and legal status
> varies from country to country, was legitimate or not.
>
> We believe that content that is allegedly illegal or objectionable is not
> “domain abuse” and is best addressed through other, well-established legal
> and regulatory methods, or through cooperative and self-regulatory 
> action by
> Internet service providers. Neither ICANN nor its contracted parties 
> should
> try to make DNS policy become the nexus for global content regulation.
>
> We remind all participants that ICANN’s mission, as defined in Section
> 1.1.(a)(i) of its bylaws, is narrowly confined to policies “for which
> uniform or coordinated resolution is reasonably necessary to 
> facilitate the
> openness, interoperability, resilience, security and/or stability of the
> DNS.” That clearly does not include content regulation. Moreover, the 
> bylaws
> contain a specific prohibition on regulating “services that use the
> Internet's unique identifiers or the content that such services carry or
> provide, outside the express scope of Section 1.1(a).”
>
> Expansion of ICANN’s mission into content regulation will further 
> politicize
> ICANN, and overload DNS policy with extraneous concerns that threaten the
> openness and interoperability of the DNS.
>
> Accordingly, we call upon the ICANN board and all ICANN policy 
> processes to
> adopt a precise and narrow definition of domain abuse, one that is
> consistent with ICANN’s limited mission.
>
>
>
> Dr. Milton L. Mueller
> Professor, School of Public Policy
> Georgia Institute of Technology 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20171029/39d58fb6/attachment.htm>