Re: .mu proposed model

From: S Moonesamy <sm+mu_at_elandsys.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 09:44:45 -0700

Hi Ish, Logan,

Thanks for the comments.

At 09:17 25-03-2015, Ish Sookun wrote:
>I'll comment on the 2007's Public consultation paper first.
>
>On page 9, I find the following paragraph appear like censorship :
>
>"In order to protect Internet domain names from indecency, words
>which are obscene, scandalous, indecent, and contrary to law or
>morality may be added to the list of reserved terms, as off-limits
>for registration."
>
>What happens if tomorrow I would want to register something like
>"geekporn.mu"?

That is a policy question. The .mu Select Committee is not working
on that question or taking decisions about it.

>On the same page, SLDs are mentioned; nic.mu, gov.mu and edu.mu are
>cited. Are there restrictions if someone would register a domain
>such as fun.mu and sell sub-domains to hotel & leisure companies?

The above is also a policy question. Please see my previous comment.

>Practices like domain hoarding and cybersquatting are mentioned. We
>do not have laws stipulated in the ICT Act pertaining to such
>practices. Will the ICT Act be amended?

Based on the comments I have seen there is currently agreement to
amend the part in the ICT Act about the Internet Management
Committee. The .mu Select Committee has not discussed about domain
name hoarding or cybersquatting.

>I am not in favour of selling WHOIS data to commercial companies.

Ok.

>Coming to the draft you mentioned several groups/organizations that
>could nominate member representatives in the .mu Council. You didn't
>mention the Mauritius Internet Users group. Will the group cease to
>exist at some point in time?

The draft is a proposal to start the discussion. That proposal was
written before the Mauritius Internet Users was invited to join the
Multi-Stakeholder Forum.

I would like this group to continue to exist as long as it can
regularly contribute to discussions about the internet in
Mauritius. I am personally not in favour of a representation model.

>You mentioned about possible conflict of interest that could arise
>through registrars. I propose the .mu Council be balanced with a
>fair number of members.

There is still the issue of conflict of interest if a .mu registrar
is on the .mu Council.

>You also mentioned "This information however should not be available
>to a registrar." It will be difficult to ascertain the same while
>having registrar representatives in the .mu Council.

Please see my previous comment.

>I think registrars could have an association of their own and they
>designate someone to represent them.

I am a representative of the Mauritius Internet Users; I do not
represent .mu registrars. I would argue for what is in the
interest of the persons participating on the mailing list, including
the .mu registrars who are on the mailing list.

>I agree that fees are to be paid to council members as they will
>have to dedicate their time and effort.

By the way, that was not included in the estimated cost.

At 09:40 25-03-2015, Loganaden Velvindron wrote:
>Experience show it is possible. There seems to be a misconception
>about what a board does.
>
>A Board shouldn't and must not be involved in the day-to-day operation
>of an organization.

The above mentions that "experience show it is possible". Could you
please provide some examples?

Regards,
S. Moonesamy
Received on Wed Mar 25 2015 - 16:49:28 PST