[discuss] discuss Digest, Vol 3, Issue 67

[Francis Augusto Medeiros]

Dear all - I'm just resending this mail to the list, as I mistakenly sent it only t


Don,

Thanks for your mail. Just to clarify this: you're saying that there has never been the use of the root in enforcement actions (ie, by the use of court orders). Could it be just because there's just no need for that right now? I mean, your conclusion is based on the lack of those acts, rather than in court decisions stating that the root is not subject to those orders, right? 

Two things are important in this discussion:

1 - registries were considered imune to court orders regarding blocking/seizure/forfeitures of domain names, as we always saw that registrars would be the ideal place for this. Of course, judges thought differently, and we saw lots of orders ordering those acts on registries on the last two years;

2 - Considering that gTLDs will now be a representation of trademarks, and considering that ACPA talks about "other domain name authority" as subject to a in rem action concerning domain names, and consider also the .web lawsuit against ICANN;

Don't you think that there is in fact space for courts to enforce their decisions directly on the root? I know it will still not practical for a lot of reasons, but it doesn't seem that far-fetched, does it?

All the best,

Francis 

> 
>> On Feb 19, 2014, at 1:24 AM, "Don Blumenthal" <dblumenthal at pir.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Assuming that ICE refers to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement,
>> domain-related court orders that it has obtained from judges generally
>> contain redirects at the name server level. Neither they nor any other LE
>> that I¹m aware of ³uses the root² in enforcement actions. Even the well
>> renowned US SOPA legislation that went nowhere wouldn¹t have provided that
>> authority. I¹m happy to provide more details based on my experience in US
>> Internet LE and the private side.
>> 
>> If I¹m wrong about what ICE means, ignore this message.
>> 
>> Don 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 2/18/14, 7:12 PM, "Jefsey" <jefsey at jefsey.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> At 00:36 19/02/2014, Phil Corwin wrote:
>>>> I have no firm personal view as to whether DOC/NTIA could lawfully
>>>> proceed as you suggest it might in 2015 in the absence of
>>>> authorizing legislation. However, as a political matter, that
>>>> Executive department and subsidiary agency might well wish to have
>>>> the cover of some type of Congressional backing before taking such a
>>>> step given the potential consequences.
>>> 
>>> Hi! Phil,
>>> Might be interesting to dig into the way ICE uses the root to "close"
>>> some domain names. And what is the legislation or jurisprudence if
>>> any to use ORSN to access them.
>>> jfc 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> discuss mailing list
>>> discuss at 1net.org
>>> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at 1net.org
>> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


__
Francis Augusto Medeiros
www.francisaugusto.com
Mobile: +47 45 17 14 91
Home: +47 21 04 96 54 
Oslo, Norway

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140226/917efbb7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: linkedin_1_1.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1611 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140226/917efbb7/linkedin_1_1.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: twitter_1_1.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1709 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140226/917efbb7/twitter_1_1.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: skype_1_1.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1839 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140226/917efbb7/skype_1_1.png>