<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
+1<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 7/22/2012 10:12 AM, Robin Gross
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:507807C8-6093-4983-8698-64E06052FDE4@ipjustice.org"
type="cite">Weighing in on this issue, personally, my preference
is for Option 1 below since no new changes have been shown to be
needed. There are already existing mechanisms in place that
provide ample opportunity for these groups to protect their
legitimate rights. What they want is something more: global
exclusive licensing rights - which does not exist anywhere in law,
but the culture of ICANN is not one of asking hard questions when
big players want special privileges.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So much of ICANN's energy is being drawn into this single
tiny issue, which is really so insignificant in comparison to
the big picture issues ICANN is facing (like pressure from govts
and altering DNS). And this issue was dealt with about 5 years
ago when the Reserve Names Working Group decided these kinds of
protections were a rat-hole and recommended against doing what
RC/IOC now ask for. So let's not let it waste anymore of the
community's energy and attention on these excessive special
privileges and let's see how the existing protection mechanisms
play out. Indeed there were no "bad applications" in the first
round that needed to be stopped based on these group's
legitimate rights. So why is it sucking out all of ICANN's
energy and attention? And what is the community not facing
because we are all focused on RC/IOC's request for special
privileges? So I vote for Option 1 below.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks,</div>
<div>Robin<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
<div>
<div>On Jul 18, 2012, at 8:23 AM, Avri Doria wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode:
space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br>
<div><br>
<div>Begin forwarded message:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span
style="font-family:'Helvetica';
font-size:medium; color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 1.0);"><b>From:
</b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica';
font-size:medium;">Brian Peck <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:brian.peck@icann.org">brian.peck@icann.org</a>><br>
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span
style="font-family:'Helvetica';
font-size:medium; color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 1.0);"><b>Subject:
</b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica';
font-size:medium;"><b>[gnso-iocrc-dt] List of
possible approaches for Red Cross/IOC names in
new gTLDS</b><br>
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span
style="font-family:'Helvetica';
font-size:medium; color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 1.0);"><b>Date:
</b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica';
font-size:medium;">18 July 2012 11:08:58 EDT<br>
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span
style="font-family:'Helvetica';
font-size:medium; color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 1.0);"><b>To:
</b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica';
font-size:medium;">"<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@icann.org">gnso-iocrc-dt@icann.org</a>"
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@icann.org">gnso-iocrc-dt@icann.org</a>><br>
</span></div>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<title>List of possible approaches for Red Cross/IOC
names in new gTLDS</title>
<div>
<font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size:11pt">In response to the
request during the last RC/IOC DT call, please
find below a list of possible approaches that
have been proposed to date for moving forward
in responding to the GAC proposal to protect
the RCRC and IOC names at the second level in
new gTLDS:<br>
<br>
</span></font>
<ol>
<li><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica,
Arial"><span style="font-size:11pt">Maintain
the status quo and not provide any new
special protections for the RCRC/IOC names
(i.e., no changes to the current schedule
of second-level reserved names in the new
gTLD Registry Agreement).
</span></font></li>
<li><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica,
Arial"><span style="font-size:11pt">Develop
recommendations to implement the GAC
proposal such as extending protection to
all or a subset of RCRC names only, all or
a subset of IOC names only or, to both
sets of each organization’s names.
</span></font></li>
<li><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica,
Arial"><span style="font-size:11pt">Consider
the proposal to not provide any new
protections now and wait to see if any
additional protections may be necessary
after the delegation of the first round
new gTLD strings and/or consider lowering
costs for each organization to utilize
RPMs ( i.e., Thomas Rickert’s proposal)
</span></font></li>
<li><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica,
Arial"><span style="font-size:11pt">Consider
possible additional protections for the
RCRC/IOC as part of a broader PDP on the
protection of names for international
organizations
</span></font></li>
<li><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica,
Arial"><span style="font-size:11pt">Ask
ICANN General Counsel’s office to conduct
a legal analysis to substantiate/verify
whether there is clear evidence of treaty
law and/or statutes that would require
registries and registrars to protect IOC
and RCRC names by law. <br>
</span></font></li>
</ol>
<font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size:11pt"><br>
Please let us know if you have any questions
or need anything further at this time.
Thanks.<br>
<br>
Best Regards,<br>
<br>
Brian <br>
<br>
Brian Peck<br>
Policy Director<br>
ICANN </span></font>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>