IP: More on House panel vote Wednesday on .kids -- vs. .kids.us

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 12:22:54 -0500
To: declan () well com
From: Alan Davidson <abd () cdt org>
Subject: Re: FC: House panel vote Wed. on bill forcing ICANN to create .kids

Hi, Declan -

As you noted, the .kids bill will be marked-up in subcommittee on
Wednesday. The markup is of a *new* bill HR 3833 - which includes two major
changes from previous legislation that was the subject of hearings this
fall:

* it calls for creation of .kids.us, not a new gTLD
* it focuses on kids 12 and under, not 17 and under

The changes do mitigate some of the problems with reaching a global
consensus on .kids, with Congress putting mandates on ICANN, and with
thorny issues about what material is appropriate for teens.

However, concerns remain: How do you come up with a country-wide consensus
on what should be in .kids? Will families in New York City and Salt Lake
City agree on what is appropriate for kids under 13? How will you enforce
such a standard? Are we giving parents false hope about creating a "safe"
zone for kids that might not be so safe? And should Congress really be
placing these mandates on a registry operator anyway?

Case in point: The bill limits .kids.us to material "suitable for minors,"
defined as material that "is not psychologically or intellectually
inappropriate for the age of the targeted audience." Who is going to
interpret that?

CDT's letter from last fall on .kids is available online at:
         
<http://www.cdt.org/dns/011031dotkids.shtml>http://www.cdt.org/dns/011031dot
kids.shtml 


We expect to put the new bill text up shortly at:
         <http://www.cdt.org/dns/>http://www.cdt.org/dns/

         - Alan


Alan Davidson, Associate Director            202.637.9800 (v)
Center for Democracy and Technology          202.637.0968 (f)
1634 Eye St. NW, Suite 1100                  <abd () cdt org>
Washington, DC 
20006                         <http://www.cdt.org>http://www.cdt.org




The Honorable Fred Upton
2333 Rayburn Office Building
United States House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

The Honorable Edward J. Markey
2108 Rayburn Office Building
United States House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

October 31, 2001

Dear Chairman Upton and Congressman Markey:

The Center for Democracy & Technology is writing to voice its questions and
concerns about a proposed Congressional mandate for a ".kids" top level
domain.  This issue is raised by H.R. 2417, the ".kids Domain Name
Act."  We understand that the legislation is moving away from creation of a
".kids" top level domain, and we are encouraged by this shift.  However, we
are writing to highlight concerns about the negative effect that such a
mandate could have on efforts to effectively protect children, free
expression, and the management of the domain name system.

The protection of children online is of paramount concern worldwide. CDT
has been a leader in seeking ways to preserve free expression online while
assuring that children are safe.  CDT was an active participant in the
development of GetNetWise, a "one-click-away" resource of information and
tools for families seeking to guide their children's online
experience.  CDT has also been active in representing public interest
perspectives at ICANN and recently co-authored a major study on public
participation in DNS coordination.

Our questions about creation of a ".kids" domain are twofold.  First, it is
not clear that creating a ".kids" top level domain would effectively
protect children online or satisfy the diverse needs of families around the
country and the world who wish to control their children's online
experience. Second, creation of the domain may well have unintended
consequences that run counter to US interests in free expression and
governance of the Internet.

1. Each American family is unique in its view of what material is
appropriate for children. Throughout the United States, parents have widely
varying opinions on what material is appropriate for their children, online
or off.  Some families greatest concern is about their child's exposure to
hate speech; others may wish to keep their child from sexually oriented
material; still others may want to avoid violent content.  What is
appropriate for a family in New York may not be right for a family in
Peoria.  Effective administration of a ".kids" domain would require
agreement on a national standard for what is right for children.  Given the
diversity of values among American families, it may be impossible to create
such an all-encompassing standard.  Doing so could result in many children
gaining access to material that their family believes is not appropriate,
or being denied access to material their parents may believe is right for
them.

2. Similarly, it is not possible to establish a single, global standard for
child-appropriateness that reflects the diversity of cultures online. The
Internet is a global network that is accessed by every country on
Earth.  The diversity of values represented on the Internet makes it
impossible to identify a uniform, "one-size-fits-all" standard of
child-appropriateness. Some kinds of content that most Americans find
inappropriate for children are acceptable abroad, and vice versa. Such a
lack of uniformity in standards seriously challenges any attempt to fairly
administer a ".kids" domain.

3. Forced migration of content to ".kids," or to other new domains, could
harm free expression values online. While not proposed today, creation of a
".kids" domain raises the fear that other domains could be mandated in the
future that might encourage discrimination against certain content.

4. A ".kids" domain could provide a tempting place for predators to
identify and contact children online. As Congress's own Commission on
Online Child Protection noted, an Internet domain devoted to children would
create a risk that "concentration of children's activities in this area
could attract predators."

5. A US Congress mandate to ICANN to create .kids should be avoided, lest
other governments attempt to do the same. While the Internet Corporation
for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is a U.S.-based organization that
manages the DNS system under arrangement with the Department of Commerce,
it is designed to serve and be responsive to the global Internet community.
A dictum from Congress that ICANN install ".kids" would threaten ICANN's
international standing and credibility as an international manager.  It
could also encourage other governments to pressure ICANN to help implement
their own policy agendas.


CDT participated as a member of the Children's Online Protection Act
Commission, established by the Congress to evaluate the accessibility, cost
and effectiveness of technologies and methods to protect children, as well
as their possible effects on privacy, First Amendment values and law
enforcement.  The Commission heard the testimony of a wide range of experts
on the issues, and concluded that the best way to protect children online
was through public education, user empowerment, and aggressive enforcement
of existing laws. The findings of the Commission indicate that there are
many reasons why the creation of a ".kids" top level domain is not a
workable solution to the problem of protecting children online.

We encourage the committee to continue its move away from a mandate for
ICANN to create a  ".kids" top level domain.  We would be happy to work
with the committee on this issue and to have the opportunity to discuss
this issue with you further.

Sincerely,

Jerry Berman
Executive Director

Alan Davidson
Associate Director



For archives see:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/