Anti-IRT speeches top ISOC-NY.ORG website

[Kathy Kleiman]

A huge thanks to Joly for taping the entire NYC session on Monday.
He has posted great segments -including my speech and some explosive
speeches from New Yorkers for Fair Use of Jay Sulzberger and Seth Johnson.

Posted at the top of:    www.isoc-ny.org

Tx Joly!
Kathy
> Video of Kathy's speech: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgUC869bTVM
>
>
>
>         *Good morning,*
>
>         *My name is Kathryn Kleiman and I represent a group not even
>         listed on the descriptions of attendees in the ICANN signup
>         for today – I represent registrants.*
>
>         *In my group, ICANN’s Noncommercial Users Constituency, our
>         102 members register their domain names on behalf of human
>         rights groups, public interest groups, community and political
>         groups worldwide. Some members risk their lives and
>         livelihoods to post content about corruption, extortion and
>         malfeasance. It is some of the very highest uses of the Internet.*
>
>         *Yet, our domain names, and those we register in the future,
>         will be at risk under the IRT proposal. I have been asked to
>         share 3 quick points:*
>
>         *1. The IRT proposal provides for only one type of abuse when
>         there are two. The IRT fears trademark infringement, but not
>         trademark lawyer abuse. Every day, trademark lawyers threaten
>         domain names. Under the guise of trademark infringement, they
>         drive out new competitors, squash those who investigate or
>         criticize them, or simply try to snatch away a good domain
>         name they did not think to register. The next group must dig
>         from the deep expertise on both side of the abuse aisle; the
>         next version must mitigate both abusive experiences.*
>
>         *2. The IRT proposal goes far beyond the two limits which
>         should be its bounds, that ICANN is a technical body with a
>         limited scope and mission, and that trademark law as it exists
>         under every law is bounded by protections for fair use and
>         freedom of expression and the right to simply use language.*
>
>         *For example, *
>
>         *A. The IP Clearinghouse takes ICANN into the job of global
>         rights protection and beyond its mission as a technical
>         manager of domain names. For ICANN to enter this field would
>         require it to become a trademark office, an examiner of the
>         registered and unregistered marks being entered. For ICANN not
>         be such an examiner, would create a gigantic database of
>         unverified intellectual property which will be misused not
>         only again against future domain name registrants but far
>         outside the scope of ICANN as well.*
>
>         *There may well be a need for this type of service, but the
>         market */*has shown that it can and will provide it. This is
>         one need the market should be allowed to meet*/*.*
>
>         *B. The Globally Protected marks List brings ICANN into an
>         area even WIPO dares not tread. There is no international
>         consensus on globally famous marks, and no list of such marks
>         prepared by WIPO nor any other international organization. It
>         is beyond the scope and mission of ICANN to be the first down
>         this path.  Further, the GPML proposal goes awry by protecting
>         these trademarks, not as marks for certain goods and services,
>         but as strings of characters protected across all new gTLDs,
>         regardless of use or relevance. This list will remove from the
>         domain name dictionary basic words, including Apple, Sun, Time
>         and People. That ICANN cannot allow. *
>
>         100.
>
>               *The Uniform Rapid Suspension Service is among the most
>               dangerous provisions. It will replace the Uniform
>               Dispute Resolution Policy with a faster, cheaper and
>               fundamentally more unfair process. It strips UDRP of
>               those few aspects that made it fair, including strong
>               requirements for notice, and a reasonable response time.
>               Domain name registrants will lose their domain names and
>               website speech before they ever know a challenge has
>               been filed. As many said in their comments, this is a
>               case of UDRP reform, but an invalid UDRP replacement.*
>
>         *We have strong objections to the thick whois and
>         post-delegation dispute mechanism, but time grows short.*
>
>
>
>         *Overall, the IRT Report includes only one half of trademark
>         law – its rights, but not its limits or fair use protections.
>         The free and fair use of language requires this balance – and
>         the free and fair of domain names too. *
>
>
>
>         *For Registrants, those at the base of the ICANN Pyramid,
>         those registering domain name for years into the future, we
>         have to get these rules right, and we must make them fair. *
>
>
>
>         *Thank you.*
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Joly MacFie  917 442 8665 Skype:punkcast
> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
> ---------------------------------------------------------------

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090715/30f7f660/attachment.html>