[PC-NCSG] Fwd: FW: NCSG Meeting with the Board : Topics (Constituency Day)
Kathy Kleiman
kathy
Fri Oct 21 01:17:40 EEST 2016
Hi Tapani,
Tx for the time until end of day. I would like to introduce another
important and timely question for our NCSG/Board meeting. It is one that
come from Mitch Stoltz and myself. Mitch is a Senior Staff Attorney at
the Electronic Frontier Foundation. He works on cases where free speech
and innovation collide with copyright and trademark law. For the first
time, he will be joining us at an ICANN meeting in India!
Currently, MItch is working on concerns about "shadow regulation."
Shadow regulation is the "secretive web of backroom agreements between
companies that seek to control our behavior online." (See Fair
Processes, Better Outcomes,
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/09/fair-processes-better-outcomes)
We have just such a shadow regulation here in our gTLD Community.
Earlier this year, Donuts signed a deal with the MPAA to take down not
just content, /but entire domain names/, of copyright owners /accused/
by the MPAA of violating their copyrights. Although the concept, MPAA as
a "trusted notifier" was taken from the US Digital Millennium Copyright
Act, it was taken without any of its fairness, balance, protections and
appeals. Basically, it's another "accuse you lose" scenario (for anyone
who remembers the first version of Uniform Rapid Suspension, before we
fought for huge changes). And Donuts is marketing this agreement as a
"Best Practice." :-(
Mitch can be with us for the NCSG-Board meeting and we propose the
following question set:
==> Does the Board continue to agree with Fadi Chehade's statement
of Summer 2015 that ICANN does not policy content,
https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann-is-not-the-internet-content-police.
Does the Board share our concerns that arrangements like the MPAA-Donuts
agreement are deeply inappropriate for the Domain Name System?
Likely response:
I think we may find relief from the Board in our asking this question.
As you may have seen, the IPC leadership is banging on the Board to
enforce copyright laws through ICANN compliance (See ICANN
Correspondence). Steve Crocker has been writing back forcefully to say
this is not within ICANN's scope and purview.
I think our questions will a) support the effort of the ICANN Board to
push back on the IPC on its push, b) and share the horrors of the
Donuts-MPAA private agreement with those members of the Board who have
not yet heard about it.
Best and tx,
Kathy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20161020/5f28a99d/attachment.html>
More information about the NCSG-PC
mailing list