[gtld-council] RE: NCUC late proposals

["Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>]

Robin,
I have read the NCUC 5 proposals and have some questions.
The questions are listed by proposal number.

1. The use of the word "prior" is a limitation on rights. 
- Why do you wish to widen it ?
Trade mark and other laws are clear. 
- Which laws relate to "freedom of expression" ?
- Does this not duplicate your recommendation 3 ?

2. Your  proposal here seems to say  "applicants should not break the law". 
- What is the point of this recommendation?
It appears to be a destructive amendment to the morality issue the group was 
trying to cover
by reference to international norms. 
- Is this its intent ?

3. You say the combined wisdom of the ICANN Government Advisory Committee is 
misguided in
their principle 2.1 to respect terms with "cultural and religious 
significance". 
- What is the basis of your judgement here ?
- Are you recommending that ICANN should have no such respect and gleefully 
accept highly
offensive names in the spirit of "neutrality" ? 

4. The group debated this issue widely. 
- Why do you now seek to change it ?
I agree it should not be seen as a technical issue. Lets just agree to move it 
elsewhere. 

5. Your desire to be objective and evaluate just the technical is admirable. 
The group I
believe would like this too but recognised that like it or not there are names 
that will
cause offence and lead to significant political objection. The group's 
aspiration was to
attempt to set up a process to prevent that. If you wish to change this 
aspiration, we need
to hear a better argument.  
- Is neutrality achieved by allowing TLDs that will offend religions, countries 
and ethnic
groups? 
(PS I thoroughly recommend the book "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins. Such 
literature
is probably a better way of attacking belief structures than doing so via 
domain names).
- What exactly does "keep the core neutral mean ?" 


Philip