Re: [icann-candidates] Re: [ga] bodacious-tata[s].NET

[Marc Schneiders <marc@venster.nl>]

On Sun, 3 Sep 2000, Joop Teernstra wrote:

[...]
> Marc,
> 
> I'm afraid you are uncomfortably close to the mark here. You are still free
> to quickly get that name. For Now.
> 
> The TATA case seems to be a typical instance of "DN-policing" in the guise
> of  a  TM dilution case. 
> Interesting is the "non-US famous name" aspect of the case. 

This is interesting indeed and raises all sorts of questions. Is it to
their advantage, because denying an Indian company their TM might look
imperialistic?

> If we look further out to the future, we can expect two broad attitudes
> (constituencies?) to emerge, those who will want to expand the URDP into
> more wide-ranging DN policing and those, like yourself,  who will want to
> protect freedom of speech in DN registration.
> 
> As more and more registrants will use the full potential of "speech" in a
> 64 alphanumeric string, more and more names will emerge that will be
> considered hate speech, obscene speech, political speech and other forms of
> addressing that many powers-that-be (and ordinary citizens) across
> different languages and cultures will want banned.  
> 
> Indeed, different cultures and language groups will want to be able to
> control their own policing.
> How about hitler_hatteRecht.com, weloveAnwar_ibrahim.com   or DN that
> insult political leaders or religious sensitivities in languages other than
> English?

I would say anything goes, including Stalin_loved_Russia.ORG. There is no
way we can censor sensibly. It is too much a matter of taste. So none of
it at all. That is my position. If people want to use tasteless names, let
them. They may find the names I choose an insult.
I do not promote being insensitive to the feelings of others, on the
contrary. But I do promote the right to say what others may not like.

> When more restrictively oriented cultures realize that  blocking  access to
> such sites doesn't work, they will demand their own policing rights, to
> "take down" such domains under the ICANN flag. 
> 
> When regionally elected directors will be questioned on their stance on
> Freedom of Speech, we are going to see some surprises.
> 
> Whatever Europeans  may have against North Americans dominating the current
> ICANN process, on Free Speech issues the "regional representativeness"
> structure of ICANN is going to have a decidedly  unAmerican effect.

This may certainly become an issue. We will just have to fight them. There
is no other option. We may loose. I am already experimenting with Freenet
(http://freenet.sourceforge.net/), which addresses blocking issues among
other things.

--
Marc Schneiders ------- Venster - http://www.venster.nl 
 marc@venster.nl - marc@bijt.net - marc@schneiders.org

--
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