[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Guía para las órdenes de nombres de dominio De: carlton.samuels@gmail.com Al ver la alarma de Lutz, me tomé el tiempo para leer el documento completo. Y yo también estoy preocupado por lo que veo y las consecuencias derivadas de ello. El documento reconoce dominio extra-judicial y extra reglamentaria- derribos, "* que está haciendo la acción legal o reglamentario, o la emisión de un * solicitud ". Incluso permite que los derribos se puede efectuar con los dominios no domiciliados en los Estados Unidos, donde la supuesta mala acción es una perfecta actividad legal. [* Consulte la página 12, punto 2 del epígrafe "adicional Consideraciones '. *] Somos conscientes de la lista de verificación, tal como se presenta es a propósito declarado como "* La información de a presentar con una * acción legal o reglamentaria ". Somos unánimes. En ausencia de proceso debido apropiado, legal y / o reglamentarias, rechazamos las acciones de dominio de derribo que atentan contra el interés público global. Star acciones de la cámara no debe incluirse dentro de cualquier parte de la ICANN.Y en este contexto - y con toda probabilidad, no deseado - este documento es un "cómo manual de instrucciones "para esas actividades. ICANN no debería considerarse para dar cabida a estos comportamientos. Debido a que socava el mensaje positivo que está tratando de proyectar sobre su internacionalización. - Carlton Samuels ============================== Carlton Samuels A Móvil: 876-818-1799 * Estrategia, Planificación, Gobierno, Evaluación y plazos * ============================= El mar, 13 de marzo 2012 a las 6:40 AM, Lutz Donnerhacke <lutz@iks-jena.de> escribió:
Hi Dave,
I'm shocked about you paper: http://tinyurl.com/icann-supports-censorship What the hell is the reason behind drafting such a collection of (at least) misleading forms?
Your wording in the preface is completely irrelevant: It will be ignored. The only thing pushed into the brains of law enforcement and politics is the simple message: "ICANN is willing to support all your needs. Fill those forms. No further questions asked."
For technical people the paper might be not directly wrong, but it is a political nightmare. By fulfilling your technically motivated desire to automate repeating tasks, you did implement the wrong solution.
ICANN has the obligation to protect the Internet by maintaining stable and secure provisioning of basic ressources. This is the main task ICANN has to fulfill due by various contracts, especially the §3 of the Articles of Incorporation as well as §3(b) of the Affirmation of Commitments.
Your paper draws the wrong solution, because it ignores this basic principle and opens the road to rank indiviual interests higher than the public interest in a single common Internet.
Given the political implications, your paper is a direct violation of §5(b) and §5(c) of the Articles of Incorporation as well as §4 of the Affirmation of Commitments.
Please let me quote from the legal document mentioned last: To ensure that its decisions are in the public interest, and not just the interests of a particular set of stakeholders, ICANN commits to perform and publish analyses of the positive and negative effects of its decisions on the public, including any financial impact on the public, and the positive or negative impact (if any) on the systemic security, stability and resiliency of the DNS.
Your paper causes a strong impact to the creditability of ICANN.
Sadly, Lutz _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@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/7c46a45f47.html --]]