[governance] A Wave of the Watch List, and Speech Disappears

[Meryem Marzouki]

Le 7 mars 08 à 15:12, Bertrand de La Chapelle a écrit :

> Dear Meryem,
>
> Interesting to turn this list into a franco-french exchange for  
> once ...:-) Just a few remarks and I stop.

Why stopping, this is an interesting discussion and exchange of  
arguments. The fact that we both are French (and now let's add Rony,  
who speaks perfect French although he's not French:)) doesn't mean  
that we're discussing a local issue.

> This was precisely my point : what you describe is not an  
> intervention on the root itself (ie : an IANA oversight function),  
> but a potential action through ICANN and its contractual  
> agreements, which is a different matter.

Agree in this case, but an intervention on the root itself could be  
considered if the goal was to suspend/remove a whole TLD.

> What I meant is that this escalation brings larger and larger  
> impact with each level : site owners can be asked to suppress very  
> small items (maybe down to a sentence), registrars and registries  
> can only act at the level of the domain name (ie the whole site).  
> But nothing can be actually done at the top root level - unless I  
> completely misunderstand the whole system, which is possible -  
> except disabling the whole TLD, a disproportionate "nuclear" action  
> if any.

Exactly, and hasn't this happened with ccTLD, ex post (with an  
existing ccTLD) or ex ante (by forbidding the creation of a new TLD)?

Regarding the analysis in terms of larger and larger impact: this is  
only the consequence, depending on which level is used to execute the  
decision. But this is not necessarily the initial objective. So,  
rather than speaking of larger and larger impact, I would rather  
compare this phenomenon to the "cascade responsibility" that applies  
with the other media (written press, audio-visual). Note that I'm not  
sure this "cascade responsibility" system applies in other legal  
press regime than in the French law (probably, at least more or less,  
since it's directly related to the editorial responsibility -- and  
liability). Rony, could you please comment on that? You certainly are  
well aware of this.

If this kind of analogy is not wrong, then this simply demonstrates  
that we're back (or still) facing issues which were already discussed  
more than 10 years ago: there are continuous attempts to impose an  
editorial liability on technical intermediaries (at different levels  
ISP, registrar, registry, etc. one should also consider search  
engines), simply because it's easier to target them and to have them  
"do the job" (censorship of contents and/or activities). Either they  
accept to be the censorship instrument or they would face themselves  
the penalty.

I'm not sure this has anything to do with global internet governance  
(but what is global internet governance? ah ah). It's a content/ 
activity regulation problem, which becomes, with the cross-border  
issue, a conflict of jurisdictions problem. Rien de nouveau sous le  
soleil (which should translate as: nothing new under the sun)!

Best,
Meryem____________________________________________________________
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