[NCSG-PC] Topics for meetings with RySG & RrSG?

[Edward Morris]

It truly is a tricky situation, Kathy. It will be interesting to see how the Registrars respond to our queries in this area. The more sophisticated Registrars, and those who are paid to represent them, will make exactly the argument you are making. A step back from that, and more convincing from my point of view, will be the argument that freedom of contract should allow parties to make such deals outside the ICANN framework. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On 28 Feb 2017, at 02:38, Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com> wrote:
> 
> Maybe. Don't we have a bylaw that says ICANN is to stay out of the content space?  We have never wanted ICANN to become the regulator of speech and content, and with the transition, I thought that we affirmed that. So we may be in a Catch-22: we don't want private agreements to bypass speech/expression protections, and this type of regulation does not belong within ICANN.  
> If that is the case, now what do we do? 
> Best, Kathy
>> On 2/27/2017 8:44 PM, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>> Hi Ed,
>> 
>> I was basically suggesting to bring it to ICANN space. we are in violent agreement.
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Rafik
>> 
>> 2017-02-28 10:41 GMT+09:00 Edward Morris <egmorris1 at toast.net>:
>>> 
>>>> with the regard to Healthy Domain Initiative and PIR's SCDRP, can we follow a more positive and proactive approach and asking them to get involved in more Multistakeholder fashion?
>>> 
>>> So more multi-stakeholder private agreements outside of ICANN, meaning all we do here is compromise to set industry floors which are then used to build maximalist protection policies threatening free speech with no guarantee of due process or appropriate privacy protection through private agreements with some sort of multi-stakeholder veneer? No thanks. If the real action is going to be the downmarket private agreements who in their right mind will volunteer to do work in ICANN? This process is a direct threat to the ICANN model with the logical end result being progressives calling for government intervention to prevent industry cartels from setting market conditions that threaten every value the NCSG was created to protect. Need I suggest that the day we have to call on the governments of the world to protect our free speech rights online is the day there no longer is such a thing. Of course when what NCSG member Rebecca McKinnon so brilliantly called Facebookistan, when applied to governance of social media by terms of service boilerplate agreements,  is extended in a modified fashion to the entire dns there may be no other option.
>>> 
>>> The process stinks, the policy stinks and this group needs to stand up for true multi-stakeholder                       principles and demand industry standards, floors and ceilings, be set inside ICANN, not outside of it. Otherwise the Donuts - MPAA agreement is the beginning of the end of this model of internet governance. 
>>> 
>>> No compromise, no surrender.
>>> 
>>> Ed
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170228/caf3ac34/attachment.htm>