Re: [soac-mapo] when is a domain name "incitement" that can be prohibited?

[Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 2011/1/17 Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"The real crime here, as far as France is concerned anyway, being insulting
the nation and not insulting the person in question."

Hmmm, this is very interesting, this insulting a nation bit.  This is a
correct interpretation.....this is the law of France, not outlaw states like
say, um....North Korea...or Iran...or Cuba?  A whole nation?  How does one
do that, you suppose?   Maybe say stuff like 'the Eiffel Tower is an old
piece of iron....and not that tall anyways!'?  Or, recall the 'french fries'
thing on Capitol Hill back in the day?  Would that qualify as an insult to
France.......maybe, a 'casus belli' if somebody 'important enough' from
somewhere 'unimportant' were to utter them?  Would this make a good case for
across the board int'l acceptance..which is the central idea for a policy
vis-a-vis MAPO?

...just thinking aloud......about that inerrancy mindset.....depending, of
course, on who you are and where you're from!!

Helluva thing, power.....or the perception of it....


==============================



2011/1/17 Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>

> Thanks Robin, very interesting and does seem of particular relevance to
> this group's work.
>
> I believe France has the same legal context as the US, i.e. it's only if
> you threaten to kill the President that you are breaking the law. That may
> however extend to any senior member of government, I am not sure. The real
> crime here, as far as France is concerned anyway, being insulting the nation
> and not insulting the person in question.
>
> In any case, when threats of this kind are made against someone who is not
> a member of government, even though it is not against the law, it may go
> against our idea of morality. Public threats against anyone's life are
> offensive to me, but that is a matter of personal ethics.
>
> So I would not like a threatening gTLD to be allowed through ICANN's
> application process unchecked. If that was a possibility, I would hope that
> some kind of mechanism be in place to allow me to challenge that
> application.
>
> Stéphane
>
>
> Le 15 janv. 2011 à 19:45, Robin Gross a écrit :
>
> Interesting real world development of relevance to the discussion on the
> legal standard of incitement / instigation to commit violence.
>
> The words "kill x" alone is not incitement under US law that can be
> prohibited (unless x is Obama).
>
> Robin
>
> .........
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/14/death-threat-domain-names_n_809174.html
>
> Death Threat Domain Names: Registrar Says Killjulianassange.com Will Not Be
> Removed<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/14/death-threat-domain-names_n_809174.html>
>
> *The Huffington Post*  Lila Shapiro Posted: 01/14/11 03:23 PM
>
>  
> BoingBoing<http://www.boingboing.net/2011/01/14/death-threat-domain.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+boingboing/iBag+(Boing+Boing)>
>  has
> a quick post up today claiming that "Registering death threats as domain
> names is the hot new thing in psychopathic anti-Wikileaks action!"
>
> According to vivantleakers.org <http://www.artificialeyes.tv/node/852> --
> a new site created to track "cyber-bullying domain names of wikileaks
> associates" -- multiple death-threat domain names have been registered going
> after Wikileaks director Julian Assange. Killjulianassange.com and
> julianassangemustdie.com are recently registered examples, although they
> have no content on them at this time.
>
> Go Daddy, the site which registered both killjulianassange.com and
> julianassangemustdie.com said there is nothing that can be done about
> either site while they are contentless. Go Daddy registers a domain name
> every .8 seconds -- any domain name can be registered and there is no human
> intervention.
>
> "Unless and until there is content associated with killjulianassange.comthere 
> is no way for us to know what that means," said Christine Jones, Go
> Daddy's General Counsel. "There's no way to judge whether there's going to
> be something done with that domain name or if it is going to be violating
> any rule."
>
> In the past week, Go Daddy has received numerous calls regarding the death
> threat domain names, but the company has no intention of taking action at
> this time. The one exception to this, Jones said, would be a domain name
> death threat for the President, "if the secret service contacted us, we
> would almost certainly take action on those domain names."
>
> Assange is no stranger to death threats of the old fashioned kind either.
> In an online chat with the *Guardian* Assange 
> wrote<http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE6B21O820101204> that
> anyone making threats against his life should be charged with incitement to
> murder: "The threats against our lives are a matter of public record,
> however, we are taking the appropriate precautions to the degree that we are
> able when dealing with a superpower."
>
> Domain name attacks have become increasingly popular in a wide range of
> scenarios.
>
> To prepare for an allegedly forthcoming WikiLeak which will supposedly
> reveal troves of highly sensitive information, Bank of America reportedly 
> bought
> up scores of domain 
> names<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/22/bank-of-america-domain-names_n_800315.html>
>  that
> are critical of the bank and CEO Brian Moynihan.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
>