[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ga-full] Re: [IFWP] Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgements
James and all,
I am in agreement with you here James. Thanks for the info though.
It seems the plot thickens or sickens, depending on you point of view! >;)
I personally find this whole mess far more complicated than it needs
or should be. But that is just my opinion, I may be wrong...
James Love wrote:
> At the recent TACD meeting, DOC and the FTC both emphasized that the US
> government was pushing ICANN to provide valid information regarding
> ownership of domains to assist in law enforcement actions and to protect
> intellectual property owners.
>
> I think it would be useful for ICANN to have a green paper published on
> the privacy issues for domain registration.
>
> Jamie
>
> PS, the Hague conference proposals are quite important, and may someday
> be related to ICANN type issues, down the road.
>
> Jeff Williams wrote:
> >
> > Joe and all,
> >
> > Thanks Joe. And you too Jamie Good info here. It seems that some
> > correction of ICANN's ways is getting underway in a much broader scale.
> > It is long past due. That is if I am reading this stuff right. I will pass
> > it along
> > as well to our members.
> >
> > Jamie or Michael, what are the issues on privacy and censorship
> > that are being considered here? Any idea? Our members seem to
> > have a strong concern with respect to ICANN purposeful disenfranchisement
> > and lack of respect for privacy that needs to be addressed. This has
> > especially
> > come to light in recent weeks with respect to DNS and Domain related
> > commerce and registration issues i.e. Register.con and bulkregister.com
> > in particular. The DNSO seems to be acting in a particularly alarming
> > practice of disenfranchisement and poor awareness of privacy issues.
> > I would be very interested in hearing either of your thought on this,
> > publicly
> > or privately. I personally am seeing a non-compliance by the DNSO/ICANN
> > with respect to the Privacy act presently. If you need some background
> > from me, please don't hesitate to ask.
> >
> > !Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
> >
> > > from Love ..
> > >
> > > ---
> > > The Hague Conference on Private International Law has issued a
> > > preliminary draft for a "Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign
> > > Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters."
> > > This contains controversial elements regarding electronic commerce.
> > > There will be a meeting of ecommerce experts in Ottawa on February 27
> > > thorugh March 1 to discuss the ecommerce issues. Consumer groups will
> > > be meeting with US officials about this meeting next week, on February
> > > 22.
> > >
> > > Here are some ULRs for information regarding the proposed convention:
> > >
> > > http://www.hcch.net/e/events/press01e.html
> > > http://cuiwww.unige.ch/~billard/ipilec/
> > > http://www.state.gov/www/global/legal_affairs/whats_new.html
> > > http://www.state.gov/www/global/legal_affairs/991030_forjudg.html
> > >
> > > One contact person in the government is Michael Donohue at the FTC. His
> > > email address is mdonohue@ftc.gov.
> > >
> > > >From the first press release, here is item 5:
> > >
> > > 5.For business-to-consumer transactions, further assessment is
> > > required in the light of all the interests involved. Particularly,
> > > during the second plenary, Professor Catherine Kessedjian proposed to
> > > avoid the traditional dichotomy between the "country of origin" (i.e.
> > > that of the seller or provider) and the "country of reception" (i.e.
> > > that of the consumer). She proposed to start with a process of
> > > site-certification along the lines of the work done within the icc and
> > > other private organisations. This certification process should include
> > > minimum substantive rules of protection for the consumer including
> > > warranties, and a fair and easy dispute resolution mechanism which could
> > > possibly be free of charge to the consumer. When a site has obtained the
> > > certification label, it could provide for the application of the law of
> > > the country of origin and for the courts of that country for the
> > > residual cases which could not be solved by the dispute resolution
> > > mechanism part of the certification. If a site has not been certified,
> > > then the law and the courts of the consumer's location would be
> > > competent.
> > >
> > > This is a controversial proposal. I'll provide additional details
> > > later. Jamie
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
> > > v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176
> > > love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > --
> > Jeffrey A. Williams
> > Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
> > CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> > Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> > E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> > Contact Number: 972-447-1894
> > Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
>
> --
> =======================================================
> James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org
> Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org
> P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030
> Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176
> =======================================================
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html