Rejection of Intellectual Property Constituency Comments

[catch-all@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

To whom it may concern:

I am writing to express my objections to the comments filed by the
Intellectual Property Constituency, available here:

http://forum.icann.org/lists/net-agreement-renewal/pdfTeYfTqqAOg.pdf

==

1. DOMAIN SEIZURES DON'T WORK AND ARE DISPROPORTIONATE

The past year has seen ample evidence that domain seizures don't work. The
extrajudicial, streamlined rough justice that the IPC and its members
advocate resulted in the erroneous seizure of 80,000 websites and their
replacement with an incorrect warning that they had previously hosted
child pornography.

http://boingboing.net/2011/02/17/dhs-erroneously-seiz.html

Meanwhile, practically every site seized went back up immediately. Of
course, some of the seized sites had been found legal in their local
courts, so it's not surprising:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/04/do-domain-seizures-keep-streaming-sites-down.ars

Site operators accused of copyright infringement should be sued in the
appropriate courts, which can issue injunctions during or after the
proceeding, on the basis of evidence. It is not appropriate to ask
Verisign to adjudicate technically complex copyright claims. The outcome
will be similar to what we've seen already: overreaching claims, seizures
of legitimate sites, and a shoot-first, ask-questions-later approach
characteristic of the IPC's members.

==

2. PRIVATE DOMAIN REGISTRATION IS A FEATURE, NOT A BUG

Many domain registrants are private individuals, lacking a commercial
office, PO box or other address for use in domain registration. Compelling
registrars to publish their customers' home addresses on the public
Internet isn't a "best practice" -- it's a privacy disaster in the making,
a gift to identity thieves and stalkers, and anything but common sense. We
don't publish our home addresses on the Internet, and neither do the
people who pay the bills at the IPC. Why should everyone else be required
to, just to save the IPC's members the trouble of securing a court order
when they believe their rights are being infringed?

==

For these reasons, I ask that you disregard the comments of the IPC in
their entirety.

Thank you,

Saul Nussbaum
2867 Webster Ave
Bronx, NY 10467