ICANN Responds to GAC

[Milton L Mueller]

> -----Original Message-----
> Quite a few governments, usually developing country, don't entirely
> trust the processes involved: they've seen names of products and culture
> trademarked by people in the North, used in dot com (for
> example) second level names, and there's a concern the same will happen
> with new gTLDs.

Ah, so we should establish intergovernmental committee to decide who has the proper right to use words. 
It's obvious, e.g., that that motorcycle company never should have been able to name their product the "Indian," we should instead have spent 5-10 years debating at the GAC who is divinely ordained to use that term - would it be the South Asian country (and which part, which agency) or the native Americans (and which tribe? Gosh!)? 

Call me crazy, but I think language and other forms of symbolic expression are pretty much in the public domain except for that narrow class of identifiers that are protected for consumer protection/fraud purposes. And yes, many times that means people get to call themselves, or their websites by names they may not be the world's most deserving of, simply because they got there first. 

> Why should they pay to protect something connected with national
> sovereignty? They won't be making challenges for personal (individual or
> corporate) gain, but for citizens.

Can you tell me more about how names are connected with national sovereignty? 
Do I need permission from the US to label my business United States Widgets? Do I need permission from France to sell French Fries? Can you point me to the international law that says only the Peruvian government has a legal right to register the name "Peru" in the domain name space? 
 
> Most govt do not have a budget line for making a payment of this kind to
> a private sector organization. 

Really now? I wonder how they fly to meetings. Do they claim a sovereign right to seat 23 A? 

> And many really don't want to pay a private US corporation, particularly
> given ICANN's odd international status.  Matter of principle.

What principle would that be?