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

[Avri Doria]

On 4 Feb 2012, at 03:38, William Drake wrote:

> So returning to KK's original message, I am for  Option 1: Recommend no changes to Guidebook and reject GAC Proposal, with an objection on process and precedent grounds complimenting the substantive case.

In terms of changes to the Guidebook.

Except that I think changing the Guidebook now breaks the GNSO requirements for a stable and predictable process, I would favor changing the guidebook by eliminating the BoardStaff policy that it currently contains making an exception for the IOC/IFRC.

avri>From From:         =?iso-8859-1?Q?"Kleinwächter,_Wolfgang"?= Sun Feb  5 10:44:08 EET 2012
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Date:         Sun, 5 Feb 2012 09:44:08 +0100
Reply-To:     =?iso-8859-1?Q?"Kleinwächter,_Wolfgang"?              <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at MEDIENKOMM.UNI-HALLE.DE>
Sender:       NCSG-Discuss <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
From:         =?iso-8859-1?Q?"Kleinwächter,_Wolfgang"?              <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at MEDIENKOMM.UNI-HALLE.DE>
Subject:      AW: [NCSG-Discuss] Questions/Options for Protection of IOC/Red
              Cross Names at Top Level
X-To:         Avri Doria <avri at ACM.ORG>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C9F6 at server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

I agree here with Avri. The guidebook has enough safeguards to prevent misuse of the names of any IGO, NGO or other organisations. If you start to make exceptions as part of a "policy" you end in a nowhere land. Each case - if one appears - can be handled individually and there a lot of instruments you can use to stop the misuse of an established and recognized IGO/NGO name. With regard to IGOs, this wll become part of GACs responsibilities, to go through the list of applications and to raise concerns if a private corporation applies for a new gTLD like .itu.

Wolfgang

________________________________

Von: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at ACM.ORG]
Gesendet: So 05.02.2012 00:54
An: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Betreff: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Questions/Options for Protection of IOC/Red Cross Names at Top Level



On 4 Feb 2012, at 03:38, William Drake wrote:

> So returning to KK's original message, I am for  Option 1: Recommend no changes to Guidebook and reject GAC Proposal, with an objection on process and precedent grounds complimenting the substantive case.

In terms of changes to the Guidebook.

Except that I think changing the Guidebook now breaks the GNSO requirements for a stable and predictable process, I would favor changing the guidebook by eliminating the BoardStaff policy that it currently contains making an exception for the IOC/IFRC.

avri