Esther and all,
In this, we completely agree. ICANN should not be involved in the rating or
filtering business. However this makes me amongst others why the
various DNSO mailing lists are involved in filtering of various sorts and
utilizing several methods? Any insight on that Esther? As you recall
I phoned you about some of this problem with respect to the [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailing list...
Esther Dyson wrote:
> FWIW, the first thing I said when I stood up was that I was speaking for
> myself and not for ICANN, since ICANN is not and should not be involved in
> the rating or filtering business.
>
> Esther Dyson
>
> At 09:30 am 09/10/1999 -0700, Mark C. Langston wrote:
> >
> >Since Esther's at the global meeting for establishing mandatory net
> >content ratings, and seems to be chafing a bit over it, I'd like to
> >point something out:
> >
> >Domain names would probably have to be rated as well.
> >Since Esther *is* at this conference, and is the de facto face of ICANN,
> >shouldn't someone speak as an official representative of ICANN on these
> >issues?
> >
> >I certainly don't want the enforcement of ratings on any content on
> >the net, and I am certain I don't want it enforced based on domain names.
> >
> >Let's face it: The only reason anyone would want a global mandatory
> >rating system is to enact filtering based on those ratings.
> >
> >If ICANN allows this to occur (and they might -- quite a bit of the money
> >behind ICANN is also propping up this ratings effort), they will be in
> >a position to become the arbiters of content on the Net.
> >
> >Since WG-C is concerned with the introduction of new gTLDs, we should be
> >very wary of this effort. One could easily imagine a push to classify
> >content based on gTLD. If you think .com's diluted and confusing now,
> >you just wait until companies are told they must use a particular gTLD
> >for a particular type of content. Everywhere you turn, there will be
> >confusing, misleading, and/or meaningless .com entries, all in an effort
> >to avoid the gTLDs created specifically to be filtered out.
> >
> >--
> >Mark C. Langston LATEST: ICANN refuses Let your voice be heard:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] to consider application for http://www.idno.org
> >Systems Admin Constituency status from organized http://www.icann.org
> >San Jose, CA individual domain name owners http://www.dnso.org
> >
> >
>
> Esther Dyson Always make new mistakes!
> chairman, EDventure Holdings
> interim chairman, Internet Corp. for Assigned Names & Numbers
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 1 (212) 924-8800
> 1 (212) 924-0240 fax
> 104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor)
> New York, NY 10011 USA
> http://www.edventure.com http://www.icann.org
>
> High-Tech Forum in Europe: 24 to 26 October 1999, Budapest
> PC Forum: March 12 to 15, 2000, Scottsdale (Phoenix), Arizona
> Book: "Release 2.0: A design for living in the digital age"
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
