[governance] Re: [Arab IGF] ICANN to get $8 Million More from New .com Deal

[Imran Ahmed Shah]

Sponsors of the Porn Industry and xxx community is given Special Privilege by the GAC. Even they claim that it is technically easy to block root level TLD comparing to filtering database, they did not given any action statement 'to block such type of domains / contents from other TLD', and yet not asked anyone 'to move current porn/xxx sites/contents from other TLDs to their sponsored gTLD'.  

Even when some one has capability to block root level access to xxx TLD, they will have support from human right and even through IG for openness, accessibility and Internet for everyone.

Practically, when you provide them space to rule as independent state, that does not mean you are reducing their influence and accessibility/ and confined.

We should not hesitate to accept that worst this also happen and one wrong decision has taken favorable to accept xxx sTLD. 

Imran
------------------------------
 On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 2:35 AM PKT Fouad Bajwa wrote:
 
 >Actually this is one important aspect of ICANN in the IG discourse.
 >One common belief among some people I the GAC that I know was that
 >with the .xxx approval could provide them a simpler ground for
 >banning, blocking, filtering and censorship just based on a simple
 >"anything + .xxx" blanket block and for some others it wasn't a bad
 >idea either. For the people in the porn industry, well they have their
 >own story which is not the issue here but I know a lot of people in
 >the SF ICANN meeting that displayed the We Support .XXX GTLD badge
 >just to be on the blocking side of the table.
 >
 >On the other discussion of legality, ICANN subject to US based
 >California laws can face injunctions, petitions and cases against its
 >judgements. This may actually come more into play when the new GTLD
 >approvals go forward. There might be resulting anger and counter
 >attempts to stop parties from launching their new gtlds but yes it is
 >yet unforeseen. I see new gtld stakeholder parties outside the US less
 >capable to do it unless they have branches in the US and can file and
 >pursue the cases.
 >
 >Its still a very US centric game field.
 >
 >Best
 >
 >Fouad
 >
 >On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch
 ><apisan at unam.mx> wrote:
 >> Fouad,
 >>
 >> that can only be tested in practice. Someone (or many "ones") must have
 >> already had this idea and studied the case. If it hasn't yet been attempted
 >> it may be that these "ones" concluded that the risk of not having a case
 >> they could win was too high for the cost-benefit ratio they were looking
 >> after.
 >>
 >> But we'll never know until it happens or some as-yet unknown stories are
 >> told.
 >>
 >> Alejandro Pisanty
 >>
 >>
 >> ! !! !!! !!!!
 >> NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO
 >>
 >>
 >>
 >> +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD
 >>
 >> +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO
 >>
 >> SMS +525541444475
 >> Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
 >> UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
 >>
 >> Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
 >> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
 >> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn,
 >> http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614
 >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
 >> ----> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org
 >> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
 >>
 >> ________________________________
 >> Desde: Fouad Bajwa [fouadbajwa at gmail.com]
 >> Enviado el: sábado, 04 de agosto de 2012 15:12
 >> Hasta: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro; governance at lists.igcaucus.org
 >> CC: fahd.batayneh at gmail.com; Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch
 >>
 >> Asunto: Re: [governance] Re: [Arab IGF] ICANN to get $8 Million More from
 >> New .com Deal
 >>
 >> Is it possible that someone with the right kind of legal backing and
 >> financial strength can drag ICANN to court and get an injunction at any
 >> point on both of the .xxx and new gtld go ahead to limit further activities
 >> on both?
 >>
 >> Fouad Bajwa
 >>
 >> On Aug 5, 2012 12:52 AM, "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro"
 >> <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
 >>
 >> Slight edits:
 >>
 >> Fahd: What makes things even worst is that many board members (in their
 >> capacity as employers of their respective firms) benifited their respective
 >> employers with the approval of the New gTLD program. Even more, some past
 >> board members jumped to greener shores with business ventures elsewhere (and
 >> I am sure you know what I exactly mean).
 >>
 >> Sal: Yes, that literally enraged the wider global community in terms of
 >> "conflict of interest" management. The reality is that situation boiled down
 >> to personal integrity and ethics as there was nothing in writing concerning
 >> that specific situation. This was of course addressed through rigorous
 >> consultations with the global community so that it never happens again.
 >>
 >>
 >>
 >>
 >>
 >>
 >>
 >> ____________________________________________________________
 >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
 >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
 >> To be removed from the list, visit:
 >> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
 >>
 >> For all other list information and functions, see:
 >> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
 >> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
 >> http://www.igcaucus.org/
 >>
 >> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
 >>
 >>
 >

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t