Re: [ga] Status of the Review Task Force

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

Chuck and all assembly members,

Gomes, Chuck wrote:

> Roberto,
>
> My apologies for taking so long to respond to this but up until yesterday my
> connectivity was extremely slow.
>
> I personally believe that there will be policies that may need to be locally
> controlled and others that should be globally controlled.

  It has very recently again become evident with the events in New York, Wash.
DC and now other places around the world, that local control of communications
must meet a minimum standard commensurate with democratic standards.

>  I also think that
> over time it will not be that hard to differentiate the two different
> categories.

  It already is not.

>  In cases where the ICANN community might propose policies
> contrary to country or territory interests, some work between affected
> parties will need to happen.

  Indeed this is quite true.

>  Where there may be impact beyond the local
> jurisdiction, I think that it may be necessary to implement a global policy
> instead of a local policy.

  Also quite correct.  However many of us have understood this naturally
for many many years.  It seems though, however, that the ICANN BoD
and staff have not.

>  Otherwise, the chances of confusion will be
> increased.  These situations will have to be dealt with on a case by case
> basis because of the variance of local laws, customs and practices, but
> ultimately I do not believe that the global implications should be ignored
> just because a country or region is involved.

  Very true.

> That I think is the nature of
> the Internet.  Any country or territory can establish their own private
> network and set their own policies for it.  When they want to play in the
> global arena, it becomes a different game.

  There is no "Game" here or there should not be.  Rather there is a
endeavor.

>
>
> Chuck
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roberto Gaetano [mailto:ga_list@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 8:19 AM
> To: cgomes@verisign.com; paul-dns@svensson.org; ga@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: [ga] Status of the Review Task Force
>
> Chuck,
>
> >
> >I would assume that the primary way of implementing policy with ccTLDs
> >would
> >be via contracts with ICANN, just like with gTLDs.
>
> In a perfect world, you would be right.
> In this imperfect world, ICANN is subject to USG authority, while the ccTLDs
>
> are designed to be subject to their countryīs authority (even if some then
> decide, without opposition from their respective countries, to be
> commercially open worldwide).
> What if ICANNīs policies would be contrary to the policies wanted by the
> country?
>
> Look at it the other way around.
> The ccTLDs have the constraint of the policies, rules, and law of their home
>
> country. To be subject to ICANNīs restrictions on top of that would be
> unfair.
>
> Of course, the situation would be different if ICANN would not be submitted
> to the authority of USG, but to international jurisdiction. But, as we say
> in Italy, you donīt make history with "if"s.
>
> Regards
> Roberto
>
> >
> >My question was really oriented toward whether or not people thought that
> >the competitive marketplace should be relatively level for all competitors
> >in the same market (e.g., open TLDs).  Some apparently think that that is
> >not necessary; in other words, some think it is okay to apply different
> >standards to some registries than to others, thereby putting some at a
> >possible disadvantage.  With the possible exception of policies relating to
> >local laws and customs, I tend to think that the competitive playing field
> >should be as level as possible.  And I think it is important to realize
> >that
> >this is not just a .com issue.  Should the new registries have more rigid
> >restrictions in operating their businesses than ccTLD registries with whom
> >they are competing?
> >
> >Chuck
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Paul Svensson [mailto:paul-dns@svensson.org]
> >Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 9:11 AM
> >To: ga@dnso.org
> >Subject: RE: [ga] Status of the Review Task Force
> >
> >
> >On Mon, 3 Sep 2001, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> >
> > >Should ccTLDs then be able to freely compete with gTLDs without having
> >the
> > >same controls that are imposed on gTLDs?
> >
> >Chuck,
> >
> >If they do so with the (implied or expressed) support of the
> >government of the country or territory designated by the ccTLD,
> >how would you plan to stop them ?
> >
> >       /Paul
> >
> >--
> >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
> >--
> >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