Letter from Senators+ on .ORG Sale

Sun Jan 12 04:00:47 EET 2020

+++1 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾

On Sunday, 12 January 2020, Martin Pablo Silva Valent <
mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
> I can only strongly oppose to have the US Congress having a say in this
> matter. I think more important than .org is to not have th US Government,
> nor any other, thinking they have some sort of oversee or jurisdiction over
> what we do. I think NCSG should actually do a statement putting the US
> Cgonress letter in place, making sure that the line we constantly draw to
> the GAC is unmistakably clear.
> I can oppose to what happened to .org for many reasons, I can also live
> with a lot of solutions that include Ethos having it, but I cannot, under
> any circumstance, live with the fact we have to “converse”, “convince” or
> “inform” the US congress of what we do. Our legitimacy, ICANN legitimacy,
> is beyond US government scope, this was the IANA Transition holy grail,
> that is the primordial fight we need to address in this letter. Can you
> imagine having the same reaction of the Russian congress? The Chinese gov?
> The Argentina gov? Is not relevant that they might be viewing thing like
> us, to some extent. That is a circunstancial coincidence. What this means
> is far  worse and dangerous than having a for profit PIR that ultimately we
> can regulate in the next contract renewal, in an already rich and diverse
> gTLD environment.
>
> I urge NCSG PC to put out a word on the letter making sure the letter is
> only an expression of speech like any other organisation or individual out
> there, but in no way has a weight, bond or obligation toward the
> independent ICANN.
>
> I think Acmes did this in good faith an ignorance, but why did they not
> come to us for ideas is beyond me. This was a mistake even they will
> someday understand. Next time a big NGO is eager, finally!, to come to play
> here, we need to be prepared to give them guidance, at least in forms if
> not content.
> Best,
> Martín
>
>
> On 10 Jan 2020, at 10:07, Kathy Kleiman <kathy at DNRC.TECH> wrote:
>
> Hi Milton,
>
> I would agree that Congressional intervention, e.g., by way of
> legislation, is not something to be sought.  I also agree that some of the
> questions in the 3 Senator + 1 Congresswoman letter were very good!
>
> Best, Kathy
> On 1/9/2020 11:52 AM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>
> Kathy
>
> The letter itself is not bad. Actually it poses a number of good points
> which we have pushed for (e.g., content neutrality).
>
> While U.S. congress critters have a right to ask questions, we have to be
> careful about what capacity they are asking in. Insofar as some parties
> involved are asking for Congressional intervention, a letter from a group
> of congressional representatives is not a simple matter of them expressing
> their opinions and concerns, it could be part of a potentially legislative
> or regulatory process. That does not seem to be the case in this instance,
> but be aware of crossing that line.
>
> Dr. Milton L Mueller
> Georgia Institute of Technology
> School of Public Policy
> <image001.png>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Kathy Kleiman <kathy at dnrc.tech> <kathy at dnrc.tech>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 8, 2020 3:56 PM
> *To:* Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu> <milton at gatech.edu>; NCSG-
> DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> *Subject:* Re: Letter from Senators+ on .ORG Sale
>
> Hi Milton,
>
> Happy New Year to you and All!  These are busy days with many deadlines.
> Apologies for the delay in responding to your important email below -- and
> tx to all who have weighed in.
>
> To your statement that we "went through the IANA transition to liberate
> DNS governance from a single jurisdiction" and your question am I
> "comfortable with asking the US Congress to get involved in this" -- I
> respond:
>
> --> We did go through a transition to ensure that the US Government would
> no longer be the oversight and veto mechanism of ICANN. Now the US
> Government is no longer "first among equals," but one of many groups and
> governments.* In a process that impacts 10 million .ORG registrants, and
> the speech of millions of organizations and individuals, do I think that
> three Senators and a Congresswomen (including ones with a known interest
> and expertise in technology oversight and one representing Silicon Valley
> since 1993) should be stopped from sharing their questions?   *No,
> everyone has a right to be part of the discussion and many are weighing in!
> The eloquent NCSG letter which you (Milton) largely penned highlights the
> commitments made by ICANN, ISOC and PIR at the delegation of .ORG in 2002
> which must be honored-- https://www.internetgovernance.org/2019/
> 12/11/icann-told-to-make-ethos-capital-conform-to-
> original-org-rfp-criteria/
>
> The SaveDotOrg Petition echoes many of the concerns voiced in the NCSG
> letter and was sent to ICANN by NCSG member EFF --
> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/
> cohn-et-al-to-botterman-et-al-17dec19-en.pdf
>
> The UN Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right of
> Freedom of Opinion and Expression and the UN Special Rapporteur on the
> Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association are asking very
> important questions of ICANN --https://freedex.org/wp-
> content/blogs.dir/2015/files/2019/12/OL-OTH-20.12.19-60.2019-ICANN.pdf
>
> <https://freedex.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/2015/files/2019/12/OL-OTH-20.12.19-60.2019-ICANN.pdf>
>
> And the letter you mentioned, from Senators Wyden, Warren, Blumenthal and
> Congresswoman Eshoo, raises similarly important questions to ISOC, PIR, and
> Ethos -- https://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/wyden-
> blumenthal-warren-and-eshoo-question-sale-of-org-domains-
> to-private-equity-firm
>
> ***
>
> Further, as you know, the ICANN Board and ICANN Staff did not use the
> ICANN Multistakeholder Model in dramatically changing the terms of the .ORG
> contract this past summer (and the rights of the 10 million .org
> registrants -- which include virtually all of us on this list).  Via
> private contract, ICANN ran roughshod over the Multikstakeholder process
> and extended the Uniform Rapid Suspension to .ORG (a domain name dispute
> policy never intended for legacy names or the complexities of
> noncommercial/commercial disputes) and allowed the create of private rules
> of content -- the type in which Jon Nevett, former co-founder of Donuts and
> now President of PIR, delights. These terms are a danger to all .ORG
> registrants, particularly longtime organizations with well-established
> websites which criticize and critique governments and corporation.  ICANN
> Staff ignored comment during the preparation of this contract -- under the
> guise that "it's a private contract and they negotiate any terms they want"
> -- and then ignored 3200+ comments opposing the new .ORG agreement. I'm not
> sure ICANN is paying much attention, if any, to the Multistakeholder
> process.
>
> So do I believe that organizations, individuals, UN representatives and
> even Senators and Congresswomen. have the right to raise their voices and
> join those asking questions of ICANN, ISOC, PIR and Ethos, absolutely.
> Frankly, I think the whole world should be raising their voices!
> Best, Kathy
>
> On 1/3/2020 8:41 PM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>
> Kathy,
>
> I am not at all comfortable with asking the U.S. Congress to get involved in this.
>
> Are you? When Access Now called for Congress to get involved it was clearly due to their lack of experience and knowledge of the IG/ICANN space. We went through the IANA transition to liberate DNS governance from a single jurisdiction. If we call them back in then what do we say when the IPR interests ask for legislation regarding Whois?
>
>
>
> --MM
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: NCSG-Discuss <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU> <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU> On Behalf Of Kathy Kleiman
>
> Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2019 8:38 AM
>
> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>
> Subject: Letter from Senators+ on .ORG Sale
>
>
>
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> Happy New Year!!  I don't think this has been posted on this list yet. On 12/23, U.S. Senators Ron Wyden, Elizabeth Warren and Richard Blumenthal, with Representative Anna Eshoo wrote a letter to PIR, Ethos Capital and ISOC questioning whether nonprofit groups, free speech and internet users would be harmed selling control of .ORG domains to a private equity firm.  It's a good letter that shows their staff did some in depth research.
>
>
>
> Overview webpage:
>
> https://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/wyden-blumenthal-warren-and-eshoo-question-sale-of-org-domains-to-private-equity-firm
>
>
>
>
>
> Letter itself:
>
> https://www.wyden.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/122319%20RW%20Letter%20to%20PIR%20ISOC%20Ethos.pdf
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Kathy (Kleiman)
>
> --
>
> Kathy Kleiman
>
> President, Domain Name Rights Coalition
>
> --
> Kathy Kleiman
> President, Domain Name Rights Coalition
>
>
>

-- 
Poncelet O. Ileleji MBCS
Coordinator
The Gambia YMCAs Computer Training Centre & Digital Studio
MDI Road Kanifing South
P. O. Box 421 Banjul
The Gambia, West Africa
Tel: (220) 4370240
Fax:(220) 4390793
Cell:(220) 9912508
Skype: pons_utd

*www.ymca.gm <http://www.ymca.gm>http://jokkolabs.net/en/
<http://jokkolabs.net/en/>*

*https://www.netfreedompioneers.org/
<https://www.netfreedompioneers.org/>   *

*www.waigf.org <http://www.waigf.org>www,insistglobal.com
<http://www.itag.gm>www.npoc.org <http://www.npoc.org>*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20200112/d0027826/attachment.htm>