Proposed IRT Joint Statement with ALAC

Kathy Kleiman Kathy at KATHYKLEIMAN.COM
Thu Jun 25 11:54:47 CEST 2009


Dear Baudouin,
One of the drafters of the Joint Statement is French. Let me talk to him
and see if he will translate.
Tx for distributing!
Kathy
> Kathy,
>
> thanks to share this draft. It's very important and I wish if possible
> to have a french version allowing me to share it among different plat
> form and network in DR Congo and Central Africa by national and sub
> regional mailing list.
> I tried to do a substantial translation but I have fear to go
> out understanding content.
> congratulations for this work.
>
> Baudouin
>
> 2009/6/23 Kathy Kleiman <Kathy at kathykleiman.com
> <mailto:Kathy at kathykleiman.com>>
>
>     Hi All,
>     For discussion purposes a little later in our meeting today, here
>     is a DRAFT Joint Statement on the IRT Report between NCUC and ALAC.
>     It would be very nice if, at the Board Public Forum on Thursday,
>     we could go up together with ALAC to make a strong joint statement.
>     That would make the Board wake up! :-)
>
>     Best,
>     Kathy
>     (below in text and attached in Word)
>
>     DRAFT
>
>     Joint Statement on the DIRT Report
>
>     From ALAC and NCUC
>
>
>
>
>
>     The At-Large Community, ALAC and the Non-Commercial Users
>     Constituency of ICANN strongly support the creation of new gTLDs.
>     Having said that, the process to move forward with changes to the
>     DAG Guidebook requires the legitimacy of full community
>     participation and full transparency.
>
>     In the case of the IRT Report, we had neither transparency nor
>     openness. The IRT Report and its recommendations harm the
>     interests of domain name Registrants and Internet end users, and
>     consequently we must object to the vast bulk of its recommendations.
>
>
>     To be more specific:
>
>     1. The Globally Protected Marks List – the GPML database- is a
>     matter well beyond ICANN's scope and its core competence. It
>     presumes to be able to resolve an issue that even WIPO wrestles
>     with. Clearly the creation of the GPML, if even possible, would
>     cause enormous complexity. Instead of speeding up the process of
>     creating new gTLDs, it would introduce delays that would last for
>     years. But the creation of this list must take place outside of ICANN.
>
>     2. The GPML takes no consideration of the actual limits of rights
>     and protections allowed to trademarks. In the real world,
>     trademark owners apply for a trademark in a specific class of
>     goods and services, and their use is bound to that class or
>     classes. By protecting a string of letters in all new gTLDs, the
>     GPML would extend trademarks into new gTLDs far beyond the bounds
>     of their class of goods and services, far beyond existing national
>     laws and internationatreaties.
>
>
>     3. We have enormous problems with the Uniform Suspension Service
>     (URS). The URS mechanism subverts conventional UDRP practice as it
>     gives entirely insufficient time for notice to the registrant of
>     the pending dispute. Thus, the registrant is unfairly limited in
>     his/her right of response and the process is missing the
>     fundamental principle of due process.
>
>
>     [ Kathy Note: This paragraph below seems to be somewhat
>     controversial within ALAC. I think we will be dropping it. Don't
>     worry, we'll include the statement in our comments -- if you all
>     agree]
>     4. ALAC and NCUC strongly object to the Thick Whois Registry. In
>     mandating such, the IRT Committee did not address any of the
>     privacy issues that arise from moving personal data from many
>     countries with data protection laws, perhaps, to a single country
>     without data protection. Does ICANN really want to be in a
>     position in which it may be violating national laws?
>
>
>     Overall, we wish the result were different. We wish the IRT had
>     delivered a reasonable proposal for the protection of trademarks.
>     But the product delivered is far outside the scope and core
>     competence of ICANN, and outside the bounds of trademark law.
>
>     We can do better; we must do better before we move forward.
>
>     Consequently, NCUC and ALAC stand before this forum together in
>     fundamental opposition to many of the IRT Results.
>
>
>
>
>
>     Signed [for sharing a written cop y of a floor statement with the
>     Board]
>
>
>
>     ALAC
>     NCUC
>
>
>
>     __________________
>     __________________
>
>     __________________
>     __________________
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN
> COORDONNATEUR NATIONAL REPRONTIC
> COORDONNATEUR SOUS REGIONAL ACSIS/AFRIQUE CENTRALE
> MEMBRE FACILITATEUR GAID AFRIQUE
> téléphone fixe: +243 1510 34 91
> Téléphone mobile:+243998983491/+243999334571
> email:b.schombe at gmail.com <mailto:email%3Ab.schombe at gmail.com>
> http://akimambo.unblog.fr
> http://educticafrique.ning.com/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090625/a02487a1/attachment.html>


More information about the Ncuc-discuss mailing list