Introduction of Freedom of Expression Topic on SubPro IRT
Stephanie E Perrin
stephanie.perrin at MAIL.UTORONTO.CA
Wed Jul 26 09:42:16 EEST 2023
I agree with you and Kathy, but framing the language will be very
difficult, given the controversies rampant at the moment about
curtailing hate speech....something I worry about a lot more than the
geographical issues, although I agree that the Amazonians ought to be
able to hang on to their name. Not sure about the .spa fight, if you
recall, the Belgian small town that wanted that name. It's a tough
issue, who decides which names are out.
So what names are already on the restricted name list, and how can we
reframe the end of that sentence to preclude some hate speech proponent
from thinking up something new that we have difficulty stopping?
Stephanie Perrin
On 2023-07-26 2:16 a.m., dorothy g wrote:
> I would definitely side with Kathy on this. There is clear precedent
> in terms of potential negative impacts. How can we adjust the
> recommendation to make it less 'sweeping' or throw it out.
> Unfortunately I am only seeing this on 26 July. Can you tell us what
> happened.
>
> On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 at 19:34, Kathy Kleiman <kathy at dnrc.tech> wrote:
>
> Juan,
>
> Tx for asking . Unfortunately here the concept is Applicant
> Freedom of Expression - sometimes at the expense of the freedom of
> expression of the rest of us. /Should Applicants for New gTLDs be
> allowed to use any word they want for any reason they want
> regardless of our rights - as registrants and users? /
>
> I'm in the camp that says no. Others have already fought this
> battle for "geos" - gTLD strings that represent well-known cities
> such as .PARIS and .LONDON. _As a Community, we agreed that
> Applicants must get the permission of the region to use this term.
> _The Amazonia Region learned the hard way that they had to fight
> for their rights to have space in . AMAZON, which was applied for
> by the company.
>
> We will continue to see groups concerned that a religion's name
> will be misused by one group within the larger community, or by
> someone with no identification with the religion whatsoever.
> These are the controversies you cannot anticipate fully ahead of time.
>
> _But the purpose of this Recommendation from the SubPro Working
> Group is *to give the Applicants for New gTLD more rights, *and
> very clear and express rights. *To be fair, that takes away some
> rights from everyone else, including us (NCSG and Noncommercial
> Registrants and Internet Users). *__I would limit this
> recommendation to be interpreted as /narrowly as possible/_//-
> /there are future new gTLDs with global impact; a lot of damage
> can be done by a new gTLD falling into the hands of a future
> registry that truly opposes what the string means (think racial,
> religious and gender hatred)./
>
> From below: /"/Applicants can apply for any available gTLD other
> than those restricted based on technical standards,
> pre-established reserved name lists, and other restrictions
> detailed in the AGB."
>
> ==> this is a problem.
>
> Best, Kathy
>
> On 7/25/2023 1:34 PM, Sam Lanfranco wrote:
>>
>> I have two minor wording comments and a more substantive comment.
>>
>> 1. Wording comment: Maybe replace “when submitting an
>> application” with “when applying”?
>> 2. Should ‘evaluation...performed by independent third-party”
>> specifically include the word “vendors” or just say
>> “independent third-parties”?
>>
>> Substantive comment: This text explains both ICANN’s respect for
>> the freedom of expression and factoring that into the new GTLD
>> proposal selection process.
>>
>> This is not the place for a wider discussion, but it is worth
>> remembering that freedom of expression is at the core of the
>> Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and that ICANN has
>> not really taken a position regarding a commitment to adhere to
>> the principles of the UNHR in its work within its remit. ICANN
>> did have a bit of a “skunk works on Human Rights” when
>> stakeholder groups ran a Working Party (not Working Group)
>> episode discussing Human Rights within the ICANN remit, There may
>> be growing pressure for ICANN to be more declarative in this area
>> going forward, Just a thought!
>>
>> Sam Lanfranco
>>
>> *From:* NCSG-Discuss <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU> *On Behalf Of *Juan Manuel
>> Rojas
>> *Sent:* Monday, July 24, 2023 8:10 PM
>> *To:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>> *Subject:* Introduction of Freedom of Expression Topic on SubPro IRT
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> As you already know some of us are working as a part of SubPro
>> IRT, currently the WG is discussing about Predictability and for
>> our next meeting (tomorrow 25th at 20 UTC) the Freedom of
>> Expression is being introduced. As a team we would like to know
>> what are your concerns with the writing of the following
>> paragraph, having into account that is a Draft to start the
>> discussion,:
>>
>> "
>>
>> Applicant Freedom of Expression - proposed AGB text
>>
>> DRAFT AGB TEXT START
>>
>> "ICANN respects the freedom of expression rights of applicants
>> that are protected under internationally recognized principles of
>> law. Applicants can apply for any available gTLD other than those
>> restricted based on technical standards, pre-established reserved
>> name lists, and other restrictions detailed in the AGB.
>> Applicants should be mindful of limitations to free expression
>> [hyperlink to LPI section] when submitting an application as
>> detailed in the AGB. Applications are subject to an evaluation
>> and objection process [hyperlink] as described in the AGB and
>> will be unsuccessful should an applied-for string be found to violate
>> applicable laws or other rights and requirements specified in the
>> AGB. The evaluation of applications, including decisions on
>> objections, will be performed by independent third party vendors
>> who will take into account freedom of expression considerations
>> together with other relevant factors. Please see the relevant
>> sections of this guidebook for more information on the evaluation
>> [hyperlink] and dispute resolution process. [hyperlink]."
>>
>> Excuse the timing but that draft was sent out until today. We
>> will be waiting your observations at this topic.
>>
>> *JUAN MANUEL ROJAS P.*
>>
>> Director - MINKA DIGITAL Colombia
>>
>> NPOC Policy Chair - NCSG/GNSO
>>
>> Founding member - ISOC Colombia
>>
>> Master IT candidate, UNAD
>>
>> Registered Linux User No.*533108.*
>>
>> /Cel. +57 301 743 56 00
>> Instagram/Twitter: @JmanuRojas <http://www.twitter.com/jmanurojas>/
>>
>>
>>
>>
> --
> Kathy Kleiman
> President, Domain Name Rights Coalition
>
>
>
> --
>
> stay well, kind regards
> Dorothy Gordon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20230726/fedc322c/attachment.htm>
More information about the Ncsg-discuss
mailing list