[Ncsg-discuss] PIR and Autistici/Inventati

[farzaneh badii]

This particular  problem is primarily not about ICANN jurisdiction. It has
to do with the registry jurisdiction. Diversifying registries jurisdiction
would be a great solution.

But lets say we need to change ICANN jurisdiction. where should it go? The
EU? They have a sanction regime that has now started sanctioning
individuals for their speech. They also have an anti-terrorism regime.
Canada has its own sanctions regime. The UK, has one of the worst sanction
regimes with terrible terrorism laws that apply online and have led to
prosecution and prison. Australia also has a sanction regime. Should ICANN
be an international org? International orgs also have a sanction regime,
for terrorism specifically.

When we warned against using terrorism framework to punish online
activities and diminish online existence, people didn’t mind it because it
was being used against the people they didn’t agree with. When we said
don’t use sanction framework for Internet infrastructure it’s never
proportional, people again didn’t mind it and wanted to use it against the
“enemy”.

Also in jurisdiction work stream 2 we worked hard to at least get some OFAC
licenses. Progress is slow but they are required to look into obtaining an
ofac license.

The problem is our legal systems and jurisdictions “globally” . The problem
is terrorism framework and sanctions. This is why we should speak up
against using these frameworks that threaten online presence, regardless of
who is being deprived of access.

Registries based in the US and other countries have been confiscating
people’s domain names from sanctioned countries for years. Registries in
the US  say domain name registrant should go and get an ofac license.
Everybody passes the ball onto somebody else. There will be a surge of
registration at CCTLD level.

We weren’t successful at encouraging registries to receive ofac licenses or
appeal a ruling or discuss with ofac or help the domain name registrant
with restoring access legally. Tech companies usually don’t do that, except
GutHub. But maybe this will allow for alternative jurisdictions to become
popular for registering domains and maybe we should encourage domain
registration in multiple jurisdictions for resiliency.


Farzaneh

On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 9:32 PM Michael Karanicolas <
0000235aca298685-dmarc-request at listserv.syr.edu> wrote:

> I don't mean to open up any old wounds from folks who were involved in
> the jurisdiction debates in Workstream 2 (or earlier...), but given
> the directions things have been going in the U.S. it's honestly
> irresponsible that they continue to wield this level of influence over
> the DNS, and that organizations like ICANN and PIR haven't done more
> to hedge against the inevitable abuses that are likely coming down the
> pike.
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 5:11 PM Kathy Kleiman
> <00001e85639e37fc-dmarc-request at listserv.syr.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Niels and All,
> >
> > I checked with PIR and learned the following:  This was an instance
> > where the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), a financial
> > enforcement agency of the US Department of the Treasury specifically put
> > these specific domain names on the “Specially Designated National” or
> > “SDN” list. The action was taken by Identity Digital (handling Registry
> > Service Provider processes), which is legally required to monitor the
> > SDN list for domains and if there’s a direct match, suspend the name to
> > comply with US OFAC obligations as a service provider. As US-based
> > companies, both ID and PIR are bound to follow US law.
> >
> > OFAC maintains an appeals process for someone seeking to get their name
> > removed from the list:
> >
> https://ofac.treasury.gov/specially-designated-nationals-list-sdn-list/filing-a-petition-for-removal-from-an-ofac-list
> .
> > If the domain names get removed from the SDN list, the suspensions can
> > be lifted.
> >
> > -------------------------
> >
> > Best regards, Kathy
> >
> > >
> > > On 8/28/2026 11:42 AM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
> > >> Hi all,
> > >>
> > >> Who is currently our representative on the PIR board? It is quite
> > >> unsettling that PIR has taken away the .org registration from an
> > >> Italian NGO following Trump government's executive order.
> > >>
> > >>
> https://sabotmedia.noblogs.org/the-server-called-paranoia-defend-autistici-inventati-before-september-25/
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Best,
> > >>
> > >> Niels
> > >>
> > >>
> > --
> > Kathy Kleiman
> > Past President, Domain Name Rights Coalition
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20260901/92be06ca/attachment.htm>