I agree that regulating content (censorship) isn't the job of
ICANN or the more openly democratic bodies that (I hope)
will emerge down the road. As for spam, however, I would
support a global ban on all email with false or misleading
addresses, plus a global rule for fast removal on-demand
from the mailing list of any and every spam marketeer. As,
ever, of course, we still need a global Internet constitution
to guarantee our privacy rights and responsibilities.
-- ken
Ken Freed
http://www.media-visions.com
"My mailbox does not belong to you."
>At 06:35 AM 4/13/99 , Esther Dyson wrote:
>>I think the notion of any worldwide body regulating spam or porn or content,
>>which should be regulated within commmunities, is scary. These are not
>>issues that need to be decided on a worldwide basis.
>
>
>Hi Esther,
>
>The U.S. Government doesn't *need* to study the
>mating habits of earth worms . . . but it does!
>
>By the same token, ICANN is *already* making
>regulatory decisions on a worldwide basis.
>
>More below . . .
>
>
>>Esther
>>
>>At 03:46 AM 12/04/99 -0400, Jay Fenello wrote:
>>>
>>>FYI:
>>>
>>>>Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 13:27:00 -0400
>>>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>From: Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>Subject: Re: [IFWP] COMMENTS ON M.A.C. RECOMMENDATIONS of MARCH 18
>>>>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>
>>>>At 05:08 AM 4/11/99 , Ellen Rony wrote:
>>>>>IMHO, a membership that is all-inclusive moves ICANN closer to center
>>>>>stage
>>>>>as a governance body -- a thought which makes me shudder. While we know
>>>>>that ICANN was established *solely* as an administrative body for the DNS,
>>>>>I can imagine that a universal, no-barrier membership body may have
>>>>>different assumptions or expectations of ICANN's corporate role -- turning
>>>>>to it for complaints about spam and porn and copyright infringement, none
>>>>>of which are issues for ICANN. ,
>>>>
>>>>Hi Ellen,
>>>>
>>>>ICANN has *always* been about Internet Governance.
>>>>
>>>>Even while the White Paper and Ira Magaziner were
>>>>talking about the "administrative management of
>>>>coordinated technical functions for the Internet,"
>>>>Larry Irving and Ira Magaziner were talking about
>>>>the establishment of Internet Governance! (It
>>>>just depended on the audience ;-)
>
>
>Here's one example of what I am talking about:
>
>
>>>>ICANN is already taking far reaching positions on
>>>>Intellectual Property ownership and rights, and
>
>
>So while you imply that ICANN will not become
>a global regulatory body, I am not encouraged.
>And I still believe that . . .
>
>
>>>>it's
>>>>only a matter of time before they tackle issues like
>>>>spam, porn, etc.
>>>>
>>>>We'd all be better off if we just accept this
>>>>fact, and respond accordingly.
>
>
>For the most part, I agree with Tamar:
> "The Internet also must have a structure. The structure
> requires some governance--central authority to establish
> the rules of the game. The important decision is where to
> draw the line, and avoid standards that are not necessary
> for the creation of successful markets. Same issue is true
> of ICANN." (I would have also included "process" as a
> critically important decision.)
>
>In other words, I'm not opposed to some *limited*
>global standards, if they are necessary, and if they
>are set through some fair and defined process :-)
>
>
>Respectfully,
>
>Jay Fenello
>President, Iperdome, Inc.
>404-943-0524 http://www.iperdome.com
