[Chapter-delegates] PIR and wikileaks.ORG

[Franck Martin]

An interesting thread to augment the discussion:

http://rxaffiliateforum.com/showthread.php?5913-Safe-Pharma-Domain-Registrar

As you may now, ENOM has decided to remove all domains that sells "drugs" which are not affiliated to licensed drug shops. 

There are a few registrar that specialize in domain hosting of questionable activities. This is an area that ICANN is most uncomfortable to handle, even if it is not providing the right tools to the community (like a proper whois).


Franck Martin 
http://www.avonsys.com/ 
http://www.facebook.com/Avonsys 
twitter: FranckMartin Avonsys 

Check your domain reputation: http://gurl.im/b69d4o 


----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Baker" <fred at cisco.com>
To: "Anya Chambers" <chambers at isoc.org>
Cc: "Franck Martin" <franck at avonsys.com>, chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
Sent: Friday, 3 December, 2010 1:18:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] PIR and wikileaks.ORG


On Dec 3, 2010, at 2:39 PM, Anya Chambers wrote:

> A ton of questions, that is in the realm of ISOC policy program. What's ISOC point of view while trying to stay away from the fight?

First: thanks for asking the ISOC community the question. 

My view:

Had a government organization served PIR or the registrar you mention with an everything-legal court order to take down a name, both of them being incorporated in the country that government runs, I think that they would be in violation of the local law had they not done so. That doesn't mean that there should not have been subsequent legal discussion; as I understand the relevant law, there are parties in the US that would *like* the ability to take down domain names under a bill (proposed law) called COICA, but there is not currently a law that authorizes such take-downs without due process.

You indicate that what in fact happened was that a stated registrar took down the name as a defensive move in response to a ddos attack. I think such an action is understandable, but lamentable. They at least owe the domain name holder an explanation of what happened.