<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19190"></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><FONT
face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#000000><FONT size=3><SPAN
class=345121610-13032012>>> </SPAN>Henceforth I recommend we propose
protection of any .org or .org.country domain name in active use by "Any
organization operating globally in the public interest and enjoying
International Legal Personality in the country where its Headquarters are
located, and its members." as of January 1 2012. This means that ICANN would
prohibit the creation of a gTLD that is the same as a domain name of an NGO in
use 1/1/12 and active.</FONT></FONT></FONT><BR><BR><SPAN
class=345121610-13032012>Down this path lies madness. Why a 2012 cutoff
date? Is this just another way of providing the established NGOs with a
monopoly on the public interest? I'd be surprised if the last global
public interest NGO has been created.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=345121610-13032012></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=345121610-13032012>This doesn't even protect existing NGOs -
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=345121610-13032012>Set aside the question of what happens when an NGO
materializes a domain name for the first time. (e.g. can it cancel existing
TLDs? Sound silly? Not really. We still have parts of the
world with limited/no internet connectivity - are they to be precluded from
developing NGOs? What about the ever popular <A
href="http://www.2138-eventof-myfavoriteNGO">www.2138-eventof-myfavoriteNGO</A>
or <A
href="http://www.disaster-relief-for-city-to-be-named-later-NGO">www.disaster-relief-for-city-to-be-named-later-NGO</A>,
say in 2015: olympiaRelief - Are they to be unable to "protect" themselves just
because we don't know what disasters will happen in the next few hundred
years?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=345121610-13032012></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=345121610-13032012>Step
back an look at this from a global perspective. This proposal is tailored
to fit a few existing organizations under the guise of a broad policy
initiative. "International legal personality" is hardly
well-defined. Why should NGOs be special? Shouldn't the Gates
Foundation have similar protection? It claims to be a charitable
organization working internationally in the public interest?
W<FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=345121610-13032012>hat if
NCSG/NCUC/NPOC decides to register a domain? Seems odd that an
organization with our charter doesn't have one - but we aren't
"protected."</SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=345121610-13032012></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=345121610-13032012>In
fact, why .org? Many organizations have picked .com - to my frustration -
because of the perception that .com is expected by the public. And
.net. Are they to be exposed simply because of their choice of
TLD?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=345121610-13032012></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=345121610-13032012>And
why shouldn't the same theory of "cheap protection" apply to other interests -
from scouting groups to religious groups to - gasp: corporations.
Corporations have been known to do good :-) </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=345121610-13032012></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=345121610-13032012>Naturally, I need to validate this note by my usual
point that domain owners who are "individuals" (natural persons) get no
protection under any of these schemes.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=345121610-13032012></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=345121610-13032012>I'm
tempted to remark that "protection" has been used as a term of art by organized
criminal groups as a synonym for extortion - but as the parallels are somewhat
loose, maybe we should simply note the word association...</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=345121610-13032012></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=345121610-13032012>So why
was a universal list of protected names created in the first place, if not to be
hijacked for creating protected classes of organizations? The answer is
simple: For the efficient development and operation of the network.
.example, example.*, .invalid and invalid.* allow documentation to be
written with uniform conventions that protect sites from people who try examples
literally. (RFC 2606) The ISO 3166 (2-letter) domains allow any country -
at any time - to have a domain. Domain-specific rules generally make sense
- e.g. geographic names under country domains (such as .no, .us), though
these suffer from the new/retired name problem. </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=345121610-13032012></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=345121610-13032012>Call
me idealistic if you like, but I think we need to stop attempts to game the
system to advantage narrow interests, and go back to the notion that
<STRONG>policy should support the efficient development and operation of the
network as a whole</STRONG>. We can still argue about how to apply that
principle in specific cases, but hopefully can dampen the squabbling over how
some group's interests trump others.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=345121610-13032012></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=345121610-13032012></SPAN></FONT><FONT
size=2>---------------------------------------------------------<BR><FONT
size=2>Timothe Litt<BR>ACM Distinguished
Engineer<BR>---------------------------------------------------------<BR>This
communication may not represent the ACM or my employer's views,<BR>if any, on
the matters discussed.<BR><BR> </FONT> </DIV></FONT><BR>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
---------- Forwarded message ----------<BR>From: <B
class=gmail_sendername>Jean-Louis Ecochard</B> <SPAN dir=ltr><<A
href="mailto:jecochard@tnc.org">jecochard@tnc.org</A>></SPAN><BR>Date: Mon,
Mar 12, 2012 at 11:42 AM<BR>Subject: Re: [npoc-voice] NPOC Proposal for IOC-RC
protection<BR>To: Alain Berranger <<A
href="mailto:alain.berranger@gmail.com">alain.berranger@gmail.com</A>>, "<A
href="mailto:npoc-voice@icann.org">npoc-voice@icann.org</A>" <<A
href="mailto:npoc-voice@icann.org">npoc-voice@icann.org</A>><BR><BR><BR>Alain,<BR><BR>Merci
de votre proposition.<BR><BR>One of the prime concern is the conversion of a
known NGO domain name into a gTLD.<BR>This is because a domain name is an NGO
brand on the internet.<BR>We also know that words like relief, cancer, heart,
peace, nature, etc. cannot receive trademark protection yet they represent
essential internet brands of the NGOs they represent.<BR>I believe ANY NGO with
a strong internet brand presence would find it disastrous to see their domain
name converted into a gTLD (e.g. In our case of <A href="http://nature.org"
target=_blank>nature.org</A> seeing a .nature gTLD).<BR><BR>Henceforth I
recommend we propose protection of any .org or .org.country domain name in
active use by "Any organization operating globally in the public interest and
enjoying International Legal Personality in the country where its Headquarters
are located, and its members." as of January 1 2012. This means that ICANN would
prohibit the creation of a gTLD that is the same as a domain name of an NGO in
use 1/1/12 and active.<BR><BR>This ensures protection of the capital invested by
NGOs on their brand presence without making it too complicated for ICANN to
administer (I.e. Check for .org existence, check if own by NGO).<BR><BR>I
welcome thoughts and discussions on this extension of Alain's
suggestion.<BR><BR>Thanks,<BR>JL<BR><BR>be green – read on the
screen<BR>--<BR>Jean-Louis Écochard<BR>Vice President and Chief Information
Officer<BR><BR>The Nature Conservancy<BR>New Zealand Office<BR>126D Apotu Road,
RD1<BR>Whangarei 0185<BR>New Zealand<BR><BR><A
href="mailto:jecochard@tnc.org">jecochard@tnc.org</A><BR>+1.703.212.3999 (New
Zealand Office US dial)<BR>+64.9.974.8195 (New Zealand
Office)<BR>+1.703.841.5342 (Arlington World Office Phone)<BR>+1.703.273.0713
(Arlington World Office Fax)<BR>+1.703.841.5304 (Executive Assistant, Jennifer
Manaloto)<BR><BR>Skype jecochard<BR>IM (MSN) <A
href="mailto:jecochard@hotmail.com">jecochard@hotmail.com</A>, (Yahoo & AIM)
<A href="mailto:jecochard@yahoo.com">jecochard@yahoo.com</A><BR>Facebook
jecochard<BR>Twitter @jecochard<BR>LinkedIn <A
href="http://nz.linkedin.com/in/jecochard"
target=_blank>http://nz.linkedin.com/in/jecochard</A><BR><BR>The Nature
Conservancy <A href="http://www.nature.org"
target=_blank>www.nature.org</A><BR>NetHope <A href="http://www.nethope.org"
target=_blank>www.nethope.org</A><BR>Conservation Commons <A
href="http://www.conservationcommons.org"
target=_blank>www.conservationcommons.org</A><BR><BR><BR>"An individual without
information can't take responsibility. An individual with information can't help
but take responsibility."<BR> - Jan Carlzon, former President and CEO of
the Scandinavian Airlines Group<BR><BR><BR><BR>From: Alain Berranger <<A
href="mailto:alain.berranger@gmail.com">alain.berranger@gmail.com</A><mailto:<A
href="mailto:alain.berranger@gmail.com">alain.berranger@gmail.com</A>>><BR>Date:
Sun, 11 Mar 2012 18:06:11 -0400<BR>To: <<A
href="mailto:npoc-voice@icann.org">npoc-voice@icann.org</A><mailto:<A
href="mailto:npoc-voice@icann.org">npoc-voice@icann.org</A>>><BR>Subject:
[npoc-voice] NPOC Proposal for IOC-RC protection<BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>
<DIV class=im><BR>Dear NPOC members:<BR><BR>Greetings from San José. As Acting
Vice Chair, I would like to consult you on an important issue:<BR><BR>Context:
Given the tension here on the IOC and Red Cross exemption (some of us call it
protection) and the Drafting Committee Chair report to GNSO this morning - we
find it wise, for the benefit of our current and future NPOC members, as well as
the ICANN Community at large, that NPOC promotes and supports a) the proposal
from the WG and b), in a broader manner, the generic extension of this
protection based on avoiding the setting of a precedent, and based on objective
and independantly verifiable criteria to define who or who does not
qualify:<BR><BR>Proposition:<BR>Would receive new gTLD protection: "Any
organization operating globally in the public interest and enjoying
International Legal Personality in the country where its Headquarters are
located, and its members."<BR><BR>Thank you for your attention to this important
matter. Please respond by Tuesday 13 March 17:00 San José time.<BR><BR>Best
regards,<BR><BR>Alain Berranger<BR>--<BR>Alain Berranger, B.Eng,
MBA<BR></DIV>Member, Board of Directors, CECI, <A href="http://www.ceci.ca"
target=_blank>http://www.ceci.ca</A><<A
href="http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/"
target=_blank>http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/</A>><BR>Executive-in-residence,
Schulich School of Business, <A href="http://www.schulich.yorku.ca"
target=_blank>www.schulich.yorku.ca</A><<A
href="http://www.schulich.yorku.ca"
target=_blank>http://www.schulich.yorku.ca</A>><BR>Trustee, Global Knowledge
Partnership Foundation, <A href="http://www.gkpfoundation.org"
target=_blank>www.gkpfoundation.org</A><<A
href="http://www.gkpfoundation.org"
target=_blank>http://www.gkpfoundation.org</A>><BR>NA representative,
Chasquinet Foundation, <A href="http://www.chasquinet.org"
target=_blank>www.chasquinet.org</A><<A href="http://www.chasquinet.org"
target=_blank>http://www.chasquinet.org</A>><BR>
<DIV class=HOEnZb>
<DIV class=h5>interim Membership Committee Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, <A
href="http://npoc.org/O:+1" target=_blank>http://npoc.org/<BR>O:+1</A> 514 484
7824; M:+1 514 704 7824<BR>Skype:
alain.berranger<BR><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV><BR><BR clear=all>
<DIV><BR></DIV>-- <BR>Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
<DIV>Member, Board of Directors, CECI, <A
href="http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/"
target=_blank>http://www.ceci.ca</A><BR>
<DIV>Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, <A
href="http://www.schulich.yorku.ca"
target=_blank>www.schulich.yorku.ca</A></DIV>
<DIV>Trustee, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation, <A
href="http://www.gkpfoundation.org"
target=_blank>www.gkpfoundation.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, <FONT color=#0a246a
face="'Times New Roman', Times, serif"><A href="http://www.chasquinet.org"
target=_blank>www.chasquinet.org</A></FONT><BR>interim Membership Committee
Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, <A href="http://npoc.org/"
target=_blank>http://npoc.org/</A><BR>O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704
7824<BR>Skype: alain.berranger<BR></DIV></DIV><BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>