Re: [ga] Help pass HR 2417 .KIDS

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Roberto and all assembly members,

Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> Bruce James wrote:
>
> >To facilitate the creation of a new global top-level Internet domain that
> >will be a haven for material that will promote positive experiences of
> >children and families using the Internet, to provide a safe online
> >environment for children, and to help prevent children from being exposed
> >to
> >harmful material on the Internet, and for other purposes.
> >
> >
> >I urge all of the GA to write, phone and email your local congressperson to
> >*Co-Sponsor HR 2417*. This bill needs co-sponsors to get anywhere. Please
> >use the link below to find their address.
> >
> >                            http://www.house.gov/writerep/
> >
> >This new gTLD .KIDS is a very good idea for the safety of our children! We
> >need your *HELP*!
>
> I strongly disagree for the following reasons:
>
> 1. The creation of a specific TLD for kids will not achieve any result,
> except to attract side by side sites really meant for kids with other
> off-topic or even counterproductive material, like kids pornography, unless
> the Registry will not be given the power to police the contents of the Web
> sites worldwide, which is illegal in some countries.

  This is not a valid reason for the following reasons:

 1.) The proposal that one of the interested parties proposed, which has
      been discussed in brief lately on the NCDNHC list (Page Howe, myself
      And Vint Cerf: See relevant archives for further details) addresses the
issue
      of questionable content at registration time of any DN within the .KIDS
      name space.  Had you reviewed the proposal, of course, you would know
this.
      It seems that you either have not or did not do so very carefully.  It
also
      seems that the ICANN BoD and staff did not either before and during
      the MDR ICANN Meeting...

2.) Content concerns with respect to pornography can be dealt with if the
registry
     is a US based registry and they are within the GATT trade agreements.

>
>
> 2. The creation of a TLD by decision of the US Congress is severely
> limitating the power of ICANN and ratifying the subordinate role of ICANN to
> USG. The immediate effect of this decision will be a reaction by non-US
> actors, and the real risk of a split of the Internet.

  This is somewhat of a n odd argument.  The Net is already split now with ICANN

introducing duplicate TLD's .BIZ and .INFO.  Hence this argument is moot at best
on
this score.  With respect to limiting the power of ICANN, the USG has always
thus far had that power, and the congress shares to some extent in the ability
to limit any non-profit corporation should the State in which it is corp.
registration
is filed fails to do so.  This seems to be the situation presently, and congress

has taken notice in a more prominent manner.  This trend may continue, it may
not.  None the less ICANN is a US non-profit corp.  As such it is bound by
US law...

> Which is, BTW, why I
> do believe that US Congress will never pass such a bill. Please note that
> the creation of a .kids.us SLD will be perfectly acceptable because it will
> act under US law and not have any international ripercussion.

  It may have international repercussion under GATT and NAFTA...

>
>
> Anyway, as a supporter of a really international Internet co-ordination body
> (which ICANN is not, BTW), I have to confess that the idea that US Congress
> might make such a stupid mistake like passing the bill and forcing the rest
> of the world to evaluate different alternatives outside the "longa manus" of
> uncle Sam tickles my imagination.

  The tickling of anyone imagination is really not all that relevant of an
argument
against such a bill being considered.  I personally thought the cybersquating
Bill was stupid as well and had no chance of passing either.  But it did...  The

US is not forcing the rest of the world into anything with this bill.  Rather it
is
suggesting that the ICANN BoD and staff need to be aware who is in charge...
And that is the stakeholders!  And the ones in the US VOTE!  Congress
folk know this, and should they wish to remain in office, they must listen
to their constituents of bare the consequences of not doing so.

>
>
> Yeah, who knows, in the future we might remember this early July for another
> "Independence Day", the beginning of a movement of independence of the
> Netizens from US Government. Might not be so bad, after all, to have a tea
> party with 13 brand new root servers! ;>)

  Good idea!  I'll support it!  >;)

>
>
> Regards
> Roberto
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k 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:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
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