Questions/Options for Protection of IOC/Red Cross Names at Top Level

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

One thing occurs to me as to why there is such pressure to get GNSO to go along.  This puts the fig-leaf of Multistakeholder decision on yet another of the decisions where the BoardStaff circumvented the process.

So, Not only do I think this is the wrong thing to do, I think it is also another slip down the slippery slope of BoardStaff decision making that circumvents the Policy process for ICANN.

The existing mechanisms are sufficient to protect IOC and IFRC at the first and even second levels - we do not need to open this barn door.

avri


On 3 Feb 2012, at 08:27, Avri Doria wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Both IOC and IFRC have been given an exception for this round of new gTLDs by direct BoardStaff fiat, though it is against every previous policy recommendation and on the advice, for some meaning of 'advice', of just one AC.  I just do not understand why they would be granted anything further than that.
> 
> avri
> 
> On 3 Feb 2012, at 07:30, Timothe Litt wrote:
> 
>> While I agree with the sentiment that the IRC has a marginally better claim to "protection" than the IOC, I oppose special protection for both.
>