[Request for Input] PIR Advisory Council Meeting Agenda

[farzaneh badii]

Hi Mitch,

Thanks a lot. NCUC also wrote a letter to the chair of PIR Board about this
and I brought it up during an advisory council meeting in February 2017.
Letter is attached.

I also brought it up in the Advisory Council face to face meeting, in
October 2017 as well. We held a workshop at IGF in 2017(December) about
ICANN and content regulation, invited Brian Cute the then CEO to tell us
why periodically PIR gets about providing a third party platform for
content regulation. Here is a brief report done by Ayden that sums it up
well.
Link to the meeting:
http://igf.wgig.org/multilingual/fr/content/igf-2017-day-3-room-xii-ws67-content-regulation-and-private-ordering-at-internet-governance

Brian Cute said that registry operators should not be arbitrators of
> content on the Internet. However, he said that they do have takedown
> policies, primarily utilised to protect the DNS from botnets, malware, and
> phishing. The only form of content regulation the Public Interest Registry
> engages in is to remove child abuse imagery and hate speech, which is
> protected speech unless there is a specific and clear call to violence as
> that is illegal in the U.S.. He stated that there is a clear process for
> takedowns and said that registry operators should rely on due process and
> the rule of law when deciding whether or not to take content down. He is
> concerned about increasing government pressure to take down content, and
> industry models that don’t reflect the requisite level of due process for
> takedowns. PIR believes that an important question is how services
> providers engage with stakeholders when considering adopting new policies.
> PIR considered an approach to systemic copyright violations but has stepped
> back from this and is reflecting about the stakeholder engagement process
> issue.


For a couple of months, they were asking us (PIR Advisory council) about
how to run a consultative process to come up with dispute resolution
platform, until they stopped.

But from time to time there are some "discussions" here and there. At NCSG
we will continue organizing workshops about why ICANN should not be a
content regulator. We also have to find ways to stop Domain Name
Association to keep appearing on ICANN meeting schedules and have closed
meetings! We will also continue telling PIR to be as neutral as possible
and not do content regulation nor come up with the idea of third party
content moderation provider.

Best regards,





Farzaneh


On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 5:13 PM Mitch Stoltz <mitch at eff.org> wrote:

> Dear Farzaneh,
>     In early 2017 we learned that PIR was, on its own initiative and with
> no public input, creating a UDRP-like arbitration system to rule on
> copyright claims against the contents of a website, presumably leading to
> domain name suspension or transfer. When EFF began asking questions about
> this, PIR announced that it was no longer pursuing it.
>
> See
> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/02/shadow-regulation-withers-sunlight
> https://pir.org/5776-2/
>
> As this is no longer an active initiative, I do not recommend that you
> bring it up at the PIR Advisory Council. But if PIR should again raise
> proposals to regulate the content of websites and Internet services as a
> domain registry in ways not required by its ICANN contract (whether for
> copyright enforcement, pharmacy registration enforcement, or any other
> goal) I encourage you to speak out about it.
>     Best,
>       Mitch
>
> Mitch Stoltz
> Senior Staff Attorney, EFF | 415-436-9333 x142https://www.eff.org/donate | https://act.eff.org/
>
> On 8/30/18 12:37 PM, farzaneh badii wrote:
>
> Dear NCSG,
>
> I am still the NCSG representative on Public Interest Registry Advisory
> Council and going to attend their meeting in October. The agenda of the
> meeting is set usually by PIR but I am hoping we can provide some feedback.
>
> What items would you like to discuss?
>
> Please let me know by  4th of September, I would like to send the
> suggestions off soon so that they have enough time to think about including
> or not including them.
>
>
>
> Best regards
> Farzaneh
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20180831/650263f5/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PIR-NCUC (2).docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 17077 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20180831/650263f5/attachment.docx>