- lac-discuss-es - lists.iana.org

Facebook Censores la revista The New Yorker
by carlton.samuels＠gmail.com Sept. 11, 2012

Sept. 11, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Facebook Censores la revista The New Yorker De: carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com Aquí vamos, la talibanización del esteta americano! Mullah Omar debe estar riendo el culo donde sea que es ...... como nunca consiguieron un guante puesto en el 'em ... - Carlton ============================== Carlton Samuels A Móvil: 876-818-1799 * Estrategia, Planificación, Gobierno, Evaluación y Turnaround * ============================= _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/ff6043229e.html --]]

1 0

El debate sobre el IPv6 llega a Córdoba
by carlos dionisio aguirre Sept. 11, 2012

Sept. 11, 2012

FYI. El debate sobre el IPv6 llega a Córdoba - Organizado por AGEIA DENSI - LACNIC y UTN http://www.lmcordoba.com.ar/nota.php?ni=103841 Carlos Dionisio Aguirre NCA GNSO Council - ICANN former ALAC member by LACRALO Abogado - Especialista en Derecho de los Negocios Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina - *54-351-424-2123 / 423-5423 http://ar.ageiadensi.org

1 0

Re: La recuperaci�n de la cirug�a
by carlton.samuels＠gmail.com Sept. 11, 2012

Sept. 11, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: La recuperación de la cirugía De: carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com Querido Alberto: Siento mucho lo de sus problemas médicos. Con la esperanza de una recuperación completa y su buena salud. - Carlton ============================== Carlton Samuels A Móvil: 876-818-1799 * Estrategia, Planificación, Gobierno, Evaluación y Turnaround * ============================= El lunes, 10 de septiembre 2012 a las 7:07 PM, <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org> escribió: > > [[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] > > Subject: Re: =? Iso-8859-1? Q? INVITATION = F3n_-_Llamada_ F3n_Reuni =? > == Iso-8859-1? Q? Conferencia_LACRALO_-_Lunes_17_de_septiembre_de_201? == > Iso-8859-1? Q? 2_a_las_23 = 3A00_UTC? = > From: asoto(a)ibero-americano.org > > Dear, as commented above, the inner me da 17 for five days > by a surgeon. Recuperacin Tendruna dedicated approximately > months. > I apologize for not being able to participate in events held > during that time. > Best Regards > > > Alberto Soto > > > [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/ec72c963a4.html --]]

1 0

Invitaci�n Reuni�n - Llamada conferencia LACRALO - Lunes 17 de septiembre de 2012 a las 23:00 UTC
by staff＠atlarge.icann.org Sept. 11, 2012

Sept. 11, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Invitación Reunión - Llamada conferencia LACRALO - Lunes 17 de septiembre de 2012 a las 23:00 UTC De: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org Queridos todos, La siguiente llamada de conferencia mensual de LACRALO está programada para el lunes 17 Septiembre de 2012 a las 23:00 UTC (tiempo por favor nota NUEVO). Para otros horarios: http://tinyurl.com/8ezfcnv El proyecto de temario para la presente convocatoria será enviado con el recordatorio. Adobe Connect: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/lacralo * Por favor, confirme su línea de espera * y el número preferido para staff(a)atlarge.icann.org. RECORDATORIO para su agenda es: Por favor, consulte a continuación la lista de las llamadas de conferencia que queda para el año 2012: Lunes 29 de octubre a las 2300 UTC (una semana más tarde debido a la ICANN Toronto Reunión) Lunes 19 de noviembre a las 23:00 UTC Lunes 17 de diciembre a las 2300 UTC Gracias. Saludos, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gruber Gisella, y Nathalie Halcón peregrino El personal de ICANN Política en apoyo de ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/ebff5ebf86.html --]]

5 6

Declaración de ALAC sobre el Estatuto URS
by Presidencia Internauta Sept. 11, 2012

Sept. 11, 2012

Estimado Compañeros, La Presidencia de ALAC, ha pedido que se realizara una votación se realizará por el ALAC sobre el proyecto de "Declaración de ALAC sobre el Estatuto URS <https://community.icann.org/x/uYEoAg> "para la comunicación a las partes interesadas. ***** Pregunta: ¿Apoya usted la ratificación de la " Declaración de ALAC sobre el Estatuto URS <https://community.icann.org/x/uYEoAg> "para la notificación a las partes relevantes? ***** Por favor, tenga en cuenta que la encuesta estará abierta desde el *10 de septiembre de 2012 23:59 UTC* al *17-Septiembre-2012 23:59 UTC.* Como es de costumbre votaré el día 17 de Septiembre de 2012, esperando el consejo de ustedes para mi votación. Saludos cordiales, -- *Sergio Salinas Porto Presidente Internauta Argentina Asociación Argentina de Usuarios de Internet <http://www.internauta.org.ar>/CTA <http://www.ctamdq.org.ar> FLUI- Federación Latinoamericana de Usuarios de Internet <http://www.fuilain.org/> facebook:salinasporto twitter:sergiosalinas MSN/MSN YAHOO/Talk: salinasporto... Skype:internautaargentina Mobi:+54 9 223 5 215819*

1 0

Re: FW: Actualizaci�n sobre las Negociaciones RAA desde Praga
by h.raiche＠internode.on.net Sept. 10, 2012

Sept. 10, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: FW: Actualización sobre las Negociaciones RAA desde Praga De: h.raiche(a)internode.on.net Gracias Carlton El verdadero desafío no será el principio: cuando me sentaba en las discusiones del equipo Whois Review, hay una aceptación general de la necesidad de proteger a los grupos que pueden estar en riesgo en determinadas situaciones políticas. El reto es poner el principio generalmente aceptado en palabras - cómo describir los grupos de derechos humanos de una forma que identifica a los grupos / personas que estarán en riesgo mientras no dar la misma protección a los que se aprovecharía para propósitos nefastos (el trabajo del SSAC mostró un gran número de personas en malware / actividad criminal mediante el dispositivo de servidor de privacidad / proxy para ocultar su identidad.) Por lo que es un claro caso de que el diablo en los detalles. Y el otro desafío es definir quién tiene acceso a los detalles y en qué circunstancias. Una vez más - una cuestión muy controvertida. Sí, es un problema real para ALAC - pero una vez que lleguemos allá principio, será un complejo conjunto de cuestiones Acebo El 11/09/2012, a las 1:58 AM, Carlton Samuels escribió: > Hi Holly: > Absolutely, the privacy issues you highlighted do attract spirited debate and very emotional responses. The ALAC has staked out its position and at least for the last 3 years, that position has been consistently reiterated: a recognition that in furtherance of free speech rights, some groups, especially ones that might be politically inconvenient, do indeed deserve some protection; a formal community embrace of defined privacy services and their providers; the conditions under which a privacy provider would be authorised. > > Best, > - Carlton > > > > ============================== > Carlton A Samuels > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround > ============================= > > > On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche(a)internode.on.net> wrote: > Hi Carlton > > Privacy was one of the really hard issues that the Whois Review had to grapple with. If you look at the initial report (as opposed to the Final and Final Final reports) two privacy issues are there. The first is how to determine registrant eligibility for the privacy server. Should it be confined to individuals, or include organisations (clear candidates would be human rights groups in many countries, womens' refuges etc) Trying to define eligibility will be a challenge. The other challenge is to define who has legitimate access to the contact information held by the privacy server. 'Law enforcement agencies' was the initial thought. But in some countries, private organisations also perform law enforcement tasks under contract to the agency. They are performing legitimate law enforcement tasks but aren't themselves, agencies. Should they have access. Even more difficult are the countries where the state itself is the oppressor - and its 'law enforcement' agencies! > > I'm sure that is the reason the Final Final report backed away from any details on the proposal - and probably why discussion is being fostered now. > > I suspect there will be many varied and divergent views within ALAC - all of them legitimate. Providing input on what is a complex, vexed issue will be a challenge for GAC - and for ALAC. > > Holly > > On 08/09/2012, at 12:46 AM, Carlton Samuels wrote: > > > FYI. Note the specific request for advice via GAC on data protection. > > - Carlton > > > > ============================== > > Carlton A Samuels > > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > > *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* > > ============================= > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: Kurt Pritz <kurt.pritz(a)icann.org> > > Date: Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:26 PM > > Subject: [soac-discussion] FW: Update on the RAA Negotiations Since Prague > > To: "soac-discussion(a)icann.org" <soac-discussion(a)icann.org> > > Cc: Matt Serlin <matt.serlin(a)markmonitor.com> > > > > > > Dear SO/AC Chairs, > > > > **** > > > > Recognizing the broad interest in the ICANN community on the RAA > > negotiations, we wanted to provide you with a brief update on the work > > conducted since the Prague Meeting for you to share with your members. > > > > **** > > > > Since Prague, the negotiation teams have reviewed the input received from > > the Community in order to identify possible path forwards on the complex > > issues that have been put on the table in these negotiations. Several > > meetings have taken place and are scheduled prior to Toronto, including > > plans to invite the GAC to provide input from data protection experts on > > several specific issues. There is also an agreement among the negotiation > > teams to begin analysis of a potential framework for a privacy/proxy > > accreditation program to be explored with the broader ICANN community. > > > > **** > > > > For more information on these important negotiations, please visit the > > ICANN wiki at: > > https://community.icann.org/display/RAA/Negotiations+Between+ICANN+and+Regi… > > > > **** > > > > Sincerely, > > > > **** > > > > Kurt Pritz (ICANN) and Matt Serlin (MarkMonitor) > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > ** ** > > <smime.p7s>_______________________________________________ > > At-Large mailing list > > At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > > > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/82951c21fc.html --]]

1 0

Re: FW: Actualizaci�n sobre las Negociaciones RAA desde Praga
by salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro＠gmail.com Sept. 10, 2012

Sept. 10, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: FW: Actualización sobre las Negociaciones RAA desde Praga De: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro(a)gmail.com También me gustaría añadir que las amenazas que acompañan al TPP da lugar a lo que Holly se menciona en términos de "aplicación de la ley privada" donde marca IP titulares, en virtud de preaviso directamente puede tener acceso. Esta es la razón leyes deben ser debatidas por la gente en los parlamentos o legislativas Asambleas. ¿Qué pasa con "Debido Proceso"? Lo que constituye un incautación legal de un Nombre de Dominio? El Martes, 11 sep 2012 a las 3:58 AM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com> escribió: > Hi Holly: > Absolutely, the privacy issues you highlighted do attract spirited debate > and very emotional responses. The ALAC has staked out its position and at > least for the last 3 years, that position has been consistently reiterated: > a recognition that in furtherance of free speech rights, some groups, > especially ones that might be politically inconvenient, do indeed deserve > some protection; a formal community embrace of defined privacy services > and their providers; the conditions under which a privacy provider would be > authorised. > > Best, > - Carlton > > > > ============================== > Carlton A Samuels > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* > ============================= > > > On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche(a)internode.on.net > >wrote: > > > Hi Carlton > > > > Privacy was one of the really hard issues that the Whois Review had to > > grapple with. If you look at the initial report (as opposed to the Final > > and Final Final reports) two privacy issues are there. The first is how > to > > determine registrant eligibility for the privacy server. Should it be > > confined to individuals, or include organisations (clear candidates would > > be human rights groups in many countries, womens' refuges etc) Trying to > > define eligibility will be a challenge. The other challenge is to > define > > who has legitimate access to the contact information held by the privacy > > server. 'Law enforcement agencies' was the initial thought. But in some > > countries, private organisations also perform law enforcement tasks under > > contract to the agency. They are performing legitimate law enforcement > > tasks but aren't themselves, agencies. Should they have access. Even > more > > difficult are the countries where the state itself is the oppressor - and > > its 'law enforcement' agencies are the very reason for the need for > > privacy. > > > > I'm sure that is the reason the Final Final report backed away from any > > details on the proposal - and probably why discussion is being fostered > now. > > > > I suspect there will be many varied and divergent views within ALAC - all > > of them legitimate. Providing input on what is a complex, vexed issue > will > > be a challenge for GAC - and for ALAC. > > > > Holly > > > > On 08/09/2012, at 12:46 AM, Carlton Samuels wrote: > > > > > FYI. Note the specific request for advice via GAC on data protection. > > > - Carlton > > > > > > ============================== > > > Carlton A Samuels > > > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > > > *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* > > > ============================= > > > > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > > From: Kurt Pritz <kurt.pritz(a)icann.org> > > > Date: Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:26 PM > > > Subject: [soac-discussion] FW: Update on the RAA Negotiations Since > > Prague > > > To: "soac-discussion(a)icann.org" <soac-discussion(a)icann.org> > > > Cc: Matt Serlin <matt.serlin(a)markmonitor.com> > > > > > > > > > Dear SO/AC Chairs, > > > > > > **** > > > > > > Recognizing the broad interest in the ICANN community on the RAA > > > negotiations, we wanted to provide you with a brief update on the work > > > conducted since the Prague Meeting for you to share with your members. > > > > > > **** > > > > > > Since Prague, the negotiation teams have reviewed the input received > from > > > the Community in order to identify possible path forwards on the > complex > > > issues that have been put on the table in these negotiations. Several > > > meetings have taken place and are scheduled prior to Toronto, including > > > plans to invite the GAC to provide input from data protection experts > on > > > several specific issues. There is also an agreement among the > > negotiation > > > teams to begin analysis of a potential framework for a privacy/proxy > > > accreditation program to be explored with the broader ICANN community. > > > > > > **** > > > > > > For more information on these important negotiations, please visit the > > > ICANN wiki at: > > > > > > https://community.icann.org/display/RAA/Negotiations+Between+ICANN+and+Regi… > > > > > > **** > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > > > > **** > > > > > > Kurt Pritz (ICANN) and Matt Serlin (MarkMonitor) > > > > > > **** > > > > > > **** > > > > > > **** > > > > > > **** > > > > > > **** > > > > > > **** > > > > > > ** ** > > > <smime.p7s>_______________________________________________ > > > At-Large mailing list > > > At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > > > > > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > At-Large mailing list > At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro alias Sala PO Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @ SalanietaT Skype: Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Celular Fiji: +679 998 2851 _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/8ab4b75018.html --]]

1 0

Re: FW: Actualizaci�n sobre las Negociaciones RAA desde Praga
by carlton.samuels＠gmail.com Sept. 10, 2012

Sept. 10, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: FW: Actualización sobre las Negociaciones RAA desde Praga De: carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com Hola Holly: Por supuesto, los problemas de privacidad que usted destacó atraen a un animado debate y las respuestas muy emocionales. El ALAC ha replanteado su posición y, al al menos durante los últimos 3 años, esa posición se ha reiterado: el reconocimiento de que en cumplimiento de los derechos de libertad de expresión, algunos grupos, especialmente los que podrían ser políticamente inconveniente, de hecho merecen algún tipo de protección, un abrazo comunidad formal de servicios de privacidad definidas y sus proveedores, las condiciones en que un proveedor de la privacidad sería autorizado. Best, - Carlton ============================== Carlton Samuels A Móvil: 876-818-1799 * Estrategia, Planificación, Gobierno, Evaluación y Turnaround * ============================= En Sun, Sep 9, 2012 a las 8:47 pm, acebo Raiche <h.raiche(a)internode.on.net> escribió: > Hi Carlton > > Privacy was one of the really hard issues that the Whois Review had to > grapple with. If you look at the initial report (as opposed to the Final > and Final Final reports) two privacy issues are there. The first is how to > determine registrant eligibility for the privacy server. Should it be > confined to individuals, or include organisations (clear candidates would > be human rights groups in many countries, womens' refuges etc) Trying to > define eligibility will be a challenge. The other challenge is to define > who has legitimate access to the contact information held by the privacy > server. 'Law enforcement agencies' was the initial thought. But in some > countries, private organisations also perform law enforcement tasks under > contract to the agency. They are performing legitimate law enforcement > tasks but aren't themselves, agencies. Should they have access. Even more > difficult are the countries where the state itself is the oppressor - and > its 'law enforcement' agencies are the very reason for the need for > privacy. > > I'm sure that is the reason the Final Final report backed away from any > details on the proposal - and probably why discussion is being fostered now. > > I suspect there will be many varied and divergent views within ALAC - all > of them legitimate. Providing input on what is a complex, vexed issue will > be a challenge for GAC - and for ALAC. > > Holly > > On 08/09/2012, at 12:46 AM, Carlton Samuels wrote: > > > FYI. Note the specific request for advice via GAC on data protection. > > - Carlton > > > > ============================== > > Carlton A Samuels > > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > > *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* > > ============================= > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: Kurt Pritz <kurt.pritz(a)icann.org> > > Date: Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:26 PM > > Subject: [soac-discussion] FW: Update on the RAA Negotiations Since > Prague > > To: "soac-discussion(a)icann.org" <soac-discussion(a)icann.org> > > Cc: Matt Serlin <matt.serlin(a)markmonitor.com> > > > > > > Dear SO/AC Chairs, > > > > **** > > > > Recognizing the broad interest in the ICANN community on the RAA > > negotiations, we wanted to provide you with a brief update on the work > > conducted since the Prague Meeting for you to share with your members. > > > > **** > > > > Since Prague, the negotiation teams have reviewed the input received from > > the Community in order to identify possible path forwards on the complex > > issues that have been put on the table in these negotiations. Several > > meetings have taken place and are scheduled prior to Toronto, including > > plans to invite the GAC to provide input from data protection experts on > > several specific issues. There is also an agreement among the > negotiation > > teams to begin analysis of a potential framework for a privacy/proxy > > accreditation program to be explored with the broader ICANN community. > > > > **** > > > > For more information on these important negotiations, please visit the > > ICANN wiki at: > > > https://community.icann.org/display/RAA/Negotiations+Between+ICANN+and+Regi… > > > > **** > > > > Sincerely, > > > > **** > > > > Kurt Pritz (ICANN) and Matt Serlin (MarkMonitor) > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > ** ** > > <smime.p7s>_______________________________________________ > > At-Large mailing list > > At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > > > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/5c8fc6bec4.html --]]

1 0

Re: Proyecto de Acuerdo de Asociaci�n Trans Pac�fico sobre IP
by hongxueipr＠gmail.com Sept. 10, 2012

Sept. 10, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Proyecto de Acuerdo de Asociación Trans Pacífico sobre IP De: hongxueipr(a)gmail.com > Hmmm, helluva thing.....wonder what the fellas in South Korea, China and > India are thinking? > negociación tal vez después de la participación formal de Japón. India no es un país del Pacífico geográficamente, sino que todo depende de interpretación. China se ha sentido fuertemente que está siendo rodeado por esta "Asociación" net por su larga costa del Pacífico. Aunque China tiene expresó su interés en por lo menos observar la negociación por fin Cumbre APEC en noviembre de 2011, se rechazó. Es poco probable que China sería bienvenido en la cumbre de la APEC en estos momentos en Rusia. Hong > > On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < > salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> The TPP will be worse than the SOPA. >> >> Add this to the EFF link:- >> >> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/27/pacific-free-trade-deal >> **** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** >> http://www.alternet.org/story/156059/trans-pacific_partnership%3A_under_cov… >> >> >> This was sent to me by one of the members of the ALS that I am a part of. >> Pay particular attention to the "NAFTA" on steroids bit. What is also >> interesting is the news that Russia has just signed an MoU with the US >> strengthening greater partnership, notwithstanding the support that it got >> from the US in joining the WTO, You can imagine that if Russia is persuaded >> to join the TPP then the likelihood that they will receive the relevant >> traction to widen the circle of the TPP Party/Parade will definitely cause >> the concerns that was raised by the EFF that was shared to us by Carlton, >> see: >> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/tpp-creates-liabilities-isps-and-put-… to >> be a reality in the not too distant future. This means ISP liabilities >> amongst a host of other things. >> >> >> On another note, Mr Wu Hongbo is the new Under Secretary General for the >> United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA), see: >> http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/usg/index.shtml >> >> >> For developing countries, the concept of "free trade" may sound lucrative >> but the reality is that it only disadvantages one (the loser). There is no >> such thing as a free lunch. To see why this is relevant to our discussions, >> I recommend visiting the link that Carlton shared earlier. >> >> >> I find the US position on this to be schizophrenic because on one end they >> are proclaiming an open and free internet and taking extraordinary measures >> to run miles away from any Treaty negotiations (please note that I am not >> for nor against Treaties, merely thinking critically about the issues) and >> yet they are going to extraordinary lengths to go around the world by >> sending their highest political officer to gain momentum for the TPP. >> >> >> It brings to mind that nations at the end of the day are about interests >> and "as long as it suits them". I will also hasten to add that there are >> many citizens in the US who are also wanting greater transparency around >> the TPP negotiations as it is likely to impact the architecture of the >> Internet and the rules of the game. >> >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> Sala >> >> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Carlton Samuels < >> carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Here's a development you might wish to follow. Some analysts say it is >>> even more dangerous than pernicious ACTA to the public interest. Those >>> countries in the L & CA region with a Pacific littoral may be party to it. >>> >>> >>> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/tpp-creates-liabilities-isps-and-put-… >>> >>> >>> - Carlton >>> >>> ============================== >>> Carlton A Samuels >>> Mobile: 876-818-1799 >>> *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* >>> ============================= >>> _______________________________________________ >>> APAC-Discuss mailing list >>> APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss >>> >>> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > APAC-Discuss mailing list > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org Profesor Dr.Hong Xue Director del Instituto para la Política de Internet y derecho (IIPL) Universidad Normal de Beijing http://www.iipl.org.cn/ 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China, _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/12396f817e.html --]]

1 0

Re: FW: Actualizaci�n sobre las Negociaciones RAA desde Praga
by h.raiche＠internode.on.net Sept. 10, 2012

Sept. 10, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: FW: Actualización sobre las Negociaciones RAA desde Praga De: h.raiche(a)internode.on.net Hola Carlton Privacidad fue uno de los temas realmente difíciles que la Revisión de Whois tenido que lidiar. Si nos fijamos en el informe inicial (a diferencia de los informes finales y la final) dos ediciones de la aislamiento están ahí. El primero es cómo determinar la elegibilidad solicitante de registro para el servidor de privacidad. En caso de que se limite a los individuos, organizaciones o incluir (candidatos claros serían los grupos de derechos humanos en muchos países, los refugios de mujeres ', etc) tratando de definir la elegibilidad será un reto. El otro reto es definir quién tiene acceso legítimo a la información de contacto en poder del servidor de privacidad. "Agencias de aplicación de la ley" era la idea inicial. Pero en algunos países, las organizaciones privadas también realizan tareas de aplicación de la ley en virtud de un contrato con la agencia. Están llevando a cabo tareas legítimas de la ley, pero no son ellos mismos, agencias. En caso de que tengan ac! ceso. Aún más difícil son los países en los que el propio Estado es el opresor - y las agencias de su 'orden público' a! volver a la razón misma de la necesidad de privacidad. Estoy seguro de que esa es la razón del informe Final se apartó de todos los detalles sobre la propuesta - y probablemente por eso la discusión se está fomentando ahora. Yo sospecho que habrá muchos puntos de vista diversos y divergentes dentro de ALAC - todos ellos legítimos. Aportando conocimientos sobre lo que es una cuestión compleja, controvertida será un reto para los GAC - y por ALAC. Acebo El 08/09/2012, a las 12:46 AM, Carlton Samuels escribiÃ³: > FYI. Note the specific request for advice via GAC on data protection. > - Carlton > > ============================== > Carlton A Samuels > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* > ============================= > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Kurt Pritz <kurt.pritz(a)icann.org> > Date: Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:26 PM > Subject: [soac-discussion] FW: Update on the RAA Negotiations Since Prague > To: "soac-discussion(a)icann.org" <soac-discussion(a)icann.org> > Cc: Matt Serlin <matt.serlin(a)markmonitor.com> > > > Dear SO/AC Chairs, > > **** > > Recognizing the broad interest in the ICANN community on the RAA > negotiations, we wanted to provide you with a brief update on the work > conducted since the Prague Meeting for you to share with your members. > > **** > > Since Prague, the negotiation teams have reviewed the input received from > the Community in order to identify possible path forwards on the complex > issues that have been put on the table in these negotiations. Several > meetings have taken place and are scheduled prior to Toronto, including > plans to invite the GAC to provide input from data protection experts on > several specific issues. There is also an agreement among the negotiation > teams to begin analysis of a potential framework for a privacy/proxy > accreditation program to be explored with the broader ICANN community. > > **** > > For more information on these important negotiations, please visit the > ICANN wiki at: > https://community.icann.org/display/RAA/Negotiations+Between+ICANN+and+Regi… > > **** > > Sincerely, > > **** > > Kurt Pritz (ICANN) and Matt Serlin (MarkMonitor) > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > ** ** > <smime.p7s>_______________________________________________ > At-Large mailing list > At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/52cca644c4.html --]]

1 0