[ncdnhc-discuss] draft resolution on Intellectual Property and Top-Level Domains

[Derek Conant]

To suggest that ICANN should not introduce any further restrictions on
the registration of new TLDs based on their connection with trademarks,
and that ICANN should approve all new Top-Level Domain applications that
can meet fair and reasonable technical criteria, is a broad and unclear
statement and request that is impossible for ICANN to implement without
chaos.

Is this a play to qualify grant moneys and funding, or what?  Is the
NCDNHC coming up with a resolution here just to say it came up with
one?  It is disappointing to see such a group of academics ignore the
basic fundamentals as to why such a resolution is unreasonable and
impossible for ICANN to implement without chaos.  The resolution does
not appear to make any sense.

For example, let's start with 3 basics issues that the NCDNHC resolution
does not realize:

      1.  What does ICANN do with multiple new TLD applications for
different applicants applying for the same new TLD?

      2.  What does ICANN do with new TLD applications concerning TLD
terms related to foreign languages and the multilingual issues?

      3.  What does ICANN do with applicants who appear to be attempting
to capture certain terms through their new TLD applications?  This is a
significant concern because I do not believe that private Internet users
and non-profit groups want a TLD applicant or any other single body
dictating the definition, use and standards concerning the use of terms
that may encompass education, legal, medical, travel, freedom, .etc
industries and interests.

The problem appears more complicated than the NCDNHC resolution
proposed.  I don't believe that the Non-Commercial Constituency
Resolution on Intellectual Property and New Top-Level Domains can be
made as simple as set forth.  And it seems to me that at least the
academic representatives in this group should know this.

The Montevideo meeting is still several weeks away.  The NCDNHC should
be able to come up with something better than the resolution proposed. 
Or, realize that it is okay to admit that the answer to the problem is
still maturing and a resolution is not possible at this time.

Derek Conant
DNSGA President and Chairman

Telephone:  (202) 801-0158
Facsimile:  (202) 234-0685
E-mail:  dconant at dnsga.org 

Chris Chiu wrote:
> 
> Non-Commercial Constituency Resolution
> on Intellectual Property and New Top-Level Domains
> Montevideo- September 7, 2000
> 
> Whereas:
> ICANN does not have the Authority to regulate intellectual property rights,
> and has neither the mandate nor the expertise to do so;
> 
> Past attempts to impose intellectual property-based restrictions (both
> through advance trademark claims within new TLDs and the Uniform Domain Name
> Dispute Resolution Policy) have contributed to corporate domination of the
> domain space at the expense of private Internet users and non-profit groups;
> and
> 
> These problems have been exacerbated by ICANN's approval of only 7 new TLDs
> to date;
> 
> Resolved:
> ICANN should not introduce any further restrictions on the registration of
> new TLDs based on their connection with trademarks; and
> 
> ICANN should approve all new Top-Level Domain applications that can meet
> fair and reasonable technical criteria.
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss