proposed statement on domain abuse and content regulation

[Cláudio Lucena]

On that note, maybe it's interesting to stress a major difference between
ICANN and other players in the environment.

All major platforms that are intermediaries in the content provision
scenario voiced for a long time the same claim that their businesses did
not allow them to engage in content regulation. However, as the service
they provide evolves and essentially diversifies in nature, keeping that
claim is becoming harder and harder to the point that they have already
admitted that crossing that line might be needed in some cases. This is
probably where Adela's concern would fit.

ICANN, though, continues to essentially perform DNS coordination. The
interplay with content does not happen in the absolute majority of its
operations, and it is almost never direct.

Irregular uses of digital resources are a tough issue that needs to be
faced for the sake of security and stability on the Internet, which is
relevant to everyone. But it would not even be advisable to span that
control among various spaces and communities with different scopes, mainly
ones which are not mandated to do so. While trying to solve a serious
problem, this could create an even more serious one.

Eventual exceptions to these rules must be absolutely extraordinary, and
the text as it is framed lets us keep track of them adequately.

--
Cláudio S. de Lucena Neto

[image: cid:image001.png at 01D03AE9.ED675EB0]

  [image:
http://www.fd.lisboa.ucp.pt/site/resources/design/fdlogo-researchcenter.jpg]


Visiting Researcher

Georgetown University Law Center

*

PhD Candidate, Research Centre for the Future of Law

Católica Global School of Law, Universidade Católica Portuguesa

*

Researcher, Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia

Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Ensino Superior de Portugal

*

Professor of Law, Center for Legal Studies

Paraíba State University (UEPB), Brazil

LinkedIn: https://br.linkedin.com/pub/cláudio-lucena/22/7a8/822

Universidade Estadual da Paraíba

www.uepb.edu.br <https://br.linkedin.com/pub/cl%C3%A1udio-lucena/22/7a8/822>

Centro de Ciências Jurídicas - Campus I

Departamento de Direito Privado

Rua Coronel Salvino de Figueiredo, 157

CEP 58.400-253

Campina Grande - PB - Brasil

Fone/Fax: *55 83 3310 9753


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

This message, as well as any attached document, may contain information
that is confidential and privileged and is intended only for the use of the
addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any disclosure, copying or distribution of this email
or attached documents, or taking any action in reliance on the contents of
this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email by
mistake.


2017-10-29 20:35 GMT-03:00 Sam Lanfranco <lanfran at yorku.ca>:

> 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
> <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/20171030/cf5d4d38/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 10669 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20171030/cf5d4d38/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2647 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20171030/cf5d4d38/attachment.jpg>