[governance] Where are we going?

[Lucy Lynch]

On Sun, 8 Apr 2007, Robin Gross wrote:

> I don't understand what is meant below by "ultra liberal" but it seems to 
> imply "extreme". 
> But the more "radical" view, in my opinion, is that one community should be 
> able to prevent the lawful speech of another community.  That is the position
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I continue to be confused by this statement/position. I see nothing in the
current ruling that prevents owners of triple xxx content from registering
domain names (in multiple g/ccTLds) and from putting up their content.

It seems to me (following up on Adam's point about the DNS as a business 
rather that a technical solution) that what's being denied here is a 
content specific label which is both a two edged sword (marketing vs 
filtering) and a major business opportunity. Different thing.

One of the primary uses of the DNS was/is to provide simple mapping of 
Internet numbers to names for mere humans. The more you kruft up every 
layer of naming, the more likely humans become to use a google/yahoo/ 
[name your favorite engine here] search rather than a DNS based URL. 
Routing around the DNS makes name registration less interesting (in the 
long run) as a way to reach end users.

See:
http://www.circleid.com/posts/google_top_10_search_terms_trademarks/
and
http://www.google.com/intl/en/press/zeitgeist.html

I'm in favor of a really simple tree and the underlying model for the 
original tree has already been set (see RFCs 1034/1035) based on a mix of 
geography and early history. It is to late to undo some of the early model 
which turned out to be US centric (.edu/.mil/.gov etc) but not to late to 
stop making those same kinds of mistakes. I also think that .travel, 
.mobi, .museum, etc. are just plain silly. Freighting the DNS with 
additional functionality/overhead to support specific business models is a 
bad idea, what ever the business.

There are lots of technical issues which are much more interesting. IDN
springs to mind in the context of communities and speech.

- Lucy

> which blatantly diverts from centuries of freedom of expression 
> jurisprudence, most notably Art. 19 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human 
> Rights (and national protections like the US Constitution). 
> Why should legal standards for freedom of expression be violated in the ICANN 
> context?
>
> Robin
>
>
> Raul Echeberria wrote:
>
>> At 11:56 a.m. 08/04/2007, Milton Mueller wrote:
>> 
>>> Izumi:
>>> You said:
>>> 
>>> "...a [new GTLD proposal] should be put in place
>>> only when there is a strong consensus by the community."
>>> 
>>> Please conduct the following thought experiment. Substitute for the
>>> word "new gTLD proposal" any other internet business in your statement.
>>> Then you will understand why I am horrified by the attitude you are
>>> expressing.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> It is very consistent with your ultra liberal position.
>> Nobody can say that you are not coherent.
>> 
>> 
>> Raúl
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
>> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>>     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>> 
>> For all list information and functions, see:
>>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>> 
>> 
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>    governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>    governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
> For all list information and functions, see:
>    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance