Digital Rights + Internet Governance + Innovation Policy

ICANN Board Approves Censorship Policy for Domain Names Based on Morality: 2 Board Members Speak Against It

Today in Paris the ICANN Board passed the GNSO's controversial recommendations to censor top level domains based on notions of "morality and public order", and broadly defined "community" wishes. However, 2 ICANN board members, law professors Wendy Seltzer (on behalf of the At-Large Internet Users) and Susan Crawford, made very powerful and compelling statements to protect free expression on the top level of the Internet. Hopefully Professor Crawford is right and this harm can be mitigated through narrowly tailored implementation.

2008 USTR Special 301 Report Summary from IP Justice

United States Trade Representative (USTR) Section 301 Annual Reports (2001-2007) Section 301 of 1984 Trade & Tariff Act (which amended 1974 Trade Act) gave the US President authority to deal with states that failed to provide “adequate and effective” protection for US intellectual property rights. Under Section 301, punishment for a foreign country that fails [...]

USTR Press Release on ACTA Negotiations

Sean Spicer of USTR on ACTA: "The main focus of the discussion was border measures, particularly how to deal with large-scale intellectual property infringements, which can frequently involve criminal elements and pose a threat to public health and safety. ..."

IGF 2008 Hyderabad: Program, Agenda and Format of Hyderabad Meeting

Internet Governance Forum (IGF) Program, Agenda and Format of the Hyderabad Meeting I. Introduction This paper aims to provide an update to the planning on programme, agenda and format of the third IGF meeting, which is to take place in Hyderabad on 3 – 6 December 2008. The paper is conceived as a rolling document [...]

US Supreme Court Hands Big Win to Free Speech Advocates in the IP World

[Major League Baseball v. CBC Distribution] By Allonn E. Levy, Esq. "An obvious “win” for Free Speech advocates and “netizens” concerned with ensuring open access to information on the Internet, the case also helps the burgeoning field of Internet information consolidators who help consumers collect information and process it. Expect to see the case cited frequently in the near future as more and more courts will be facing cases where Internet based information companies battle these issues out with content holders..."

US Congress Cites Free Expression as Reason ICANN Must Remain Controlled by US Govt.

US Congressmen are up to their old tricks of pretending to care about free expression publicly, while undermining it's practice with their policy decisions -- especially when it comes to free speech on the Internet. Congressman Edward Markey, the Chairman of the Congressional Sub-committee on Telecommunications and the Internet sent a letter urging the US Government to refuse to relinquish unilateral oversight of ICANN, the US Commerce Department created organization set up to manage the Internet's root server. Although the reason given by the politicians for needing the US to dominate Internet policy is to protect freedom of expression on the Internet, it is worth noting that ICANN and the US Congress have consistently refused to respect freedom of expression principles in its Internet policy-making choices. (Remember the new ICANN plan to prohibit top-level domain names that are offensive, immoral, disorderly, and desired by 'established institutions'?) The Internet Governance Project Blog discusses in more detail the irony of using freedom of expression arguments in order to continue to engage in censorship at ICANN. The post is worth a read to anyone who cares about freedom of expression on the Internet....

IP Justice Statement at IGF Open Consultation of IGF Dynamic Coalition for Access to Knowledge and Free Expression (A2K@IGF)

"IPR protection has always been given to creators and inventors in exchange for some benefit to the public. These are usually included in IP law as exceptions and limitations that can provide a benefit to the public. For example, when copyright owners permit the copying of their materials for private and educational use, they contribute to the general pool of knowledge available on the Internet. The practice of remixing, re-using, editing, and combining of audio-video and text to comment on culture and create transformative works depends upon a system of robust exceptions and limitations to exclusive rights. This coalition supports innovation and the creation of wealth through IPR incentivization, but we also seek to support alternative models for creating knowledge goods, including free and open source software, or open scholarly and scientific journals, and on-line access to scholarly research, publicly funded research, and essential documents such as legal information. The A2K@IGF coalition welcomes a discussion in Hyderabd that explores best practices for promoting sharing of knowledge and access to information and that explores a variety of business models designed to encourage creativity and innovation. We welcome participation from all stakeholders in this ongoing discussion to build an open and inclusive Internet to promote human development and individual empowerment...."

Draft Program Outline for the Third Meeting of the IGF in Hyderabad in Dec. 2008

Draft Program Outline for the Third Meeting of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) Hyderabad, 3-6 December 2008 Introduction This paper aims to provide an input into the open round of consultations on 13 May 2008 to discuss programme and agenda for the third meeting of the IGF in Hyderabad. It gives a first draft programme [...]

IP Justice White Paper on the Proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)

In 2007 a select handful of the wealthiest countries began a treaty-making process to create a new global standard for intellectual property rights enforcement, the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). ACTA is spearheaded by the United States, the European Commission, Japan, and Switzerland -- those countries with the largest intellectual property industries. Other countries invited to participate in ACTA’s negotiation process are Canada, Australia, Korea, Mexico and New Zealand. Noticeably absent from ACTA’s negotiations are leaders from developing countries who hold national policy priorities that differ from the international intellectual property industry....

Signup for the Latest News



Copyright 2022 IP Justice | All Rights Reserved

Go to Top