Open letter to ICANN from the Legal Counsels of intergovernmental organizations

[Alex Gakuru]

Also see under IOC - Imitation of Christ ;-)

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Alex Gakuru <gakuru at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:10 AM, David Cake <dave at difference.com.au>wrote:
>
>>
>> On 19/12/2011, at 2:22 PM, William Drake wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> As expected, the UN and other public intergovernmental organizations are
>> now demanding that their names and acronyms be protected---not only at the
>> top, but the second level as well—"Consistent with the rationale for
>> protection envisaged for the important causes represented by the
>> International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the
>> International Olympic Committee."  The door has been opened, why wouldn't
>> they want to go through it?
>>
>> The letter is attached below.  Kieren has an article on this at
>> http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/12/14/igos-special-gtld-exemption.  While I
>> agree with him that there is no chance of a TLD application with an
>> international organization's name or acronym making it through the
>> application process anyway, that the second level demand is problematic,
>> and that the guidebook mechanisms would seem sufficient, it's not obvious
>> that ICANN can easily tell these organizations to just chill out and expect
>> them to go away.
>>
>>
>> IMF, to take one example, is a three letter acronym that also can mean a
>> mapping form (so IMF.map, for example, would seem a reasonable 2LD), a
>> fictional spy agency (the Impossible Mission Force), and a publicly listed
>> company in Australia specialising in litigation (who would probably
>> strongly object to them not being able to even bid for imf.com or
>> imf.law), and scientific term for the Interplanetary Magnetic Field (so
>> imf.space or imf.science or imf.astro etc). The idea that a TLA deserves
>> special protection at the 2LD level is ridiculous, and characteristic of a
>> level of cluelessness.
>>  We should try pretty hard to lobby the GAC that his not get consensus
>> support, IMO. Our best chance to give ICANN an easy reason to reject this
>> nonsense.
>>
>
>
> For over 49 different IMF meanings, please have a look at
> http://www.acronymfinder.com/IMF.html. At the bottom of the page "*Note: *We
> have 200 other definitions for *IMF <http://www.acronymattic.com/IMF.html>
> * in our Acronym Attic"  So who should have an automatic right of
> ownership?
>
> Alex
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20111219/fa3c3290/attachment-0001.html>