[AusNOG] [off-topic] US lawmakers bring in worldwide censorship laws

Tue Sep 28 11:49:48 EST 2010

>From commercial point of view, it might be even good if such
fragmentation occurs, since all the paying customers will stay in the
"clean pool" (or whatever you want to call it, maybe "walled garden"
:) ) and anyone using the "alternative" roots can be outlawed/filtered
by operators as well. Even this bill has a vague provision for ISPs to
block DNS resolution of certain domains one way or another

1 ‘‘(i) a service provider, as that term is
2 defined in section 512(k)(1) of title 17,
3 United States Code, or other operator of a
4 domain name system server shall take rea-
sonable steps that will prevent a domain
6 name from resolving to that domain
7 name’s Internet protocol address;

As with many heavily dramatised Internet censorship scenarios, the
masses will simply not notice that this or similar laws are adopted
(unless the technology breaks). How many of the hundreds of millions
people online (well, less in case of Australia) do actually feel
strong about these issues? How many from AusNOG? 3 people? :)

Regards,
Vitaly

On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Chris Chaundy <chris.chaundy at gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think the point of the posting is that much off-topic (it
> should be of concern to all of us), I think that other topics
> (Conroy's filter and Internet wire-tapping) are mixing things up a
> bit.
>
> <rant>
> While I don't think it will happen, this does come up periodically.
> While I am not sure if things have changed (I have tried deliberately
> to keep out of DNS issues for some years now), as I understand it,
> while ICANN is responsible for the root name-servers, it has this
> responsibility at the whim of the US Department of Commerce, so there
> is a lot of control there.  Sure, there are quite a number of roots or
> mirror-roots that operate outside of US borders, you can bet your life
> that the contracts to run these are as tight as all hell and with more
> DNS security appearing every day, subverting things will be a lot
> harder, but the fact is we are just talking about names here, and
> there have been proposals to set up 'alternative roots' in the past,
> and you can bet that if a law like this was passed, there would be a
> great incentive to proceed down this path.  ICANN has fought
> tooth-and-nail against such action as this would not only fragment the
> Internet name-space but it would also have drastic commercial
> implications, and as such, I think it will be unlikely that such a law
> will see the light of day.
>
> The one thing that does worry me is that while I don't know the ins
> and outs, I am concerned about what Howard's 'Free Trade Agreement'
> with the US has committed Australia to do.  After all, auDA operates
> at the whim of the Federal Government.
> </rant>
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Vitaly Osipov <vitaly.osipov at gmail.com> wrote:
>> They are definitely trying hard to get their government minds around
>> this intertubes thing over there in the US...
>>
>> https://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/27/us/27wiretap.html
>>
>> "U.S. Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet"
>>
>> Regards,
>> Vitaly
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 9:08 AM, James Troy (PageUp/AU/VIC)
>> <jamest at pageuppeople.com> wrote:
>>> This is certainly strange, they know other countries wont recognise
>>> their legal system, so they are trying to impose it within their own
>>> jurisdiction. This might work for some registrars but I thought the AU
>>> registrar was based in AU, perhaps I am wrong, but if I am correct any
>>> site with a 2byte domain therefore would be exempt from this law.
>>>
>>> To go even a step further a .nl domain is euro based therefore once
>>> again not recognising their (the US) legal system.
>>>
>>> This is interesting days and it will take a massive battle to overcome
>>> this and at the end of the day, if the local government bows to the
>>> wishes of the US it would be upto the 'accused' to fight the US
>>> legislation. Certainly not a spot I would want to be in, but im glad im
>>> not a pirate :)
>>>
>>> James Troy
>>> System / Network administrator
>>> P: +613 8677 3735
>>> F: +613 9923 6112
>>> W: www.pageuppeople.com
>>> Level 10, 91 William Street
>>> Melbourne VIC 3000 Australia
>>> Retain  Recruit  Perform  Develop
>>>  PageUp People
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  people on the same page
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net
>>> [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Kai
>>> Sent: Tuesday, 28 September 2010 8:54 AM
>>> To: ausnog
>>> Subject: [AusNOG] [off-topic] US lawmakers bring in worldwide censorship
>>> laws
>>>
>>> Sorry for the off topic post but, is this for real? I wonder how long
>>> before Conroy tries to do this...
>>>
>>> US lawmakers bring in worldwide censorship laws
>>> www.techeye.net/internet/us-lawmakers-bring-in-worldwide-censorship-laws
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> AusNOG mailing list
>>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>>
>>>
>>> Wondering why you are 'brain dead' at the end of the day? Check out the new PageUp People blog to find out. http://blog.pageuppeople.com/
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> AusNOG mailing list
>>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>