[NCSG-Discuss] Fwd: [gnso-igo-ingo] With updated member attendance: MP3 IGO-INGO Protections Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group - 20 February 2013
Carl Smith
lectriclou at HOTMAIL.COM
Mon Feb 25 20:35:08 CET 2013
Thanks Robin,
Seems the indications should be clear to everyone. Even so called
nonprofit organizations have highly paid representation and overhead
expense, so thus have budget concerns. In effect they act in accord
with commercial interests. The C.... Y... A.. effect is human nature.
Lou
On 2/25/2013 12:20 PM, Robin Gross wrote:
> Interesting snap-shot of groups who want special privileges to domain
> names and have come to ICANN for them.
>
> In this working group to make recommendations to give special
> privileges to certain organizations,
> At least 4 representatives of the Red Cross (in 1 form or another).
> 3 reps from the Int'l Olympic Cmte (IOC)
> 5 reps from other IGO's, "the me too gang"
>
> Even still, a relatively small investment for one of these groups to
> participate in an ICANN working group will yield hugely lucrative
> rewards if their lobbyists are successful.
>
> Robin
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> *From: *Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine at icann.org
>> <mailto:nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>>
>> *Date: *February 25, 2013 7:40:26 AM PST
>> *To: *"GNSO IGO INGO (gnso-igo-ingo at icann.org
>> <mailto:gnso-igo-ingo at icann.org>)" <gnso-igo-ingo at icann.org
>> <mailto:gnso-igo-ingo at icann.org>>
>> *Cc: *GNSO Secretariats <gnso-secs at icann.org
>> <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>>
>> *Subject: **[gnso-igo-ingo] With updated member attendance: MP3
>> IGO-INGO Protections Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group -
>> 20 February 2013*
>>
>> Dear All,
>> The next call for the IGO-INGO Protections Policy Development Process
>> (PDP) Working Group is scheduled on*Wednesday 27 Februaryat_19:00 UTC._*
>> Please find the MP3 recording of the IGO-INGO Protections Policy
>> Development Process (PDP) Working Group teleconference held
>> onWednesday 20 February2013 at 1700 UTC at:
>> http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-20130221-en.mp3
>> On page:http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#feb
>> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO
>> Master Calendar page:
>> http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/
>> Attendees:
>> Jim Bikoff – IPC/IOC
>> Avri Doria – NCSG
>> Chuck Gomes - RySG
>> Alan Greenberg - ALAC
>> Catherine Gribbin - Red Cross
>> Stephane Hankins–International Committee of the Red Cross
>> David Heasley - IPC/IOC
>> Kiran Malancharuvil - IPC/IOC
>> Christopher Rassi - Red Cross
>> Thomas Rickert – NCA –Working group chair
>> Claudia MacMaster Tamarit - ISO
>> Mary Wong - NCUC
>> Mason Cole - GNSO Council vice chair - RrSG
>> Lanre Ajayi - NCA
>> Debra Hughes - NPOC
>> Wolfgang Kleinwachter – NCSG
>> Ricardo Guilherme – RySG
>> Joanne Teng – WIPO ( standing in for David Roache-Turner)
>> Sam Paltridge - OECD
>> Gregory Shatan - IPC
>> David Roache-Turner - WIPO
>> Apologies:
>> Iliya Bazlyankov – RrSG
>> Evan Leibovitch – ALAC
>> Paul Diaz – RySG
>> Guilaine Fournet – (IEC)
>> Alain Berranger - NPOC
>> ICANN Staff:
>> Berry Cobb
>> Nathalie Peregrine
>> ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **
>> Thank you.
>> Kind regards,
>> Nathalie
>> *************
>> _Adobe Chat transcript__for 20 February2013:_
>> Berry Cobb:Welcome to the 20 FEB 2013 IGO-INGO Conference call.
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):HI Berry and Nathalie - I will be absent
>> for a few minutes but should re-join shortly
>> Nathalie Peregrine:Noted Ricardo.
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):back
>> Kiran Malancharuvil:Good afternoon, Jim Bikoff, David Heasley and
>> myself on the call as well as in chat.
>> Kiran Malancharuvil:Thanks!
>> Nathalie Peregrine:Thank you Kiran, noted!
>> Alan Greenberg:Waiting to get on...
>> Nathalie Peregrine:Mary Wong has joined the AC room
>> Alan Greenberg:on now
>> Mary Wong:Me too (sorry, was waiting for the operator for a while)
>> Avri Doria:misserd it was on mute. ok, another time.
>> Nathalie Peregrine:Stephane Hankins has joined the call
>> Alan Greenberg:Thomas, you are saying General Council/Counsel in
>> stead of GNSO Council.
>> Nathalie Peregrine:Debra Hughes has joined the call
>> Nathalie Peregrine:Iliya Bazlyankov sends apologies for this call
>> Kiran Malancharuvil/Jim Bikoff (IOC):@Alan - it's against the law
>> to cybersquat using someone else's words/marks.
>> Berry Cobb:http://www.wto.com is the biggest example of "claiming
>> to be" or confusing as to whether the page is that of WTO or not.
>> Claudia MacMaster Tamarit:Agree with Kiran here.
>> Kiran Malancharuvil/Jim Bikoff (IOC):Also, regarding Avri's
>> comment, just because an organization controls a number of domain
>> names acros multiple TLDs doesn't mean we are not harmed by that.
>> The need for defensive registration is a harm.
>> Claudia MacMaster Tamarit:Exactly Kiran.
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):+1 to IOC's remarks above
>> Avri Doria:I understand that some feel the existsnce of Harm is not
>> a necessary condition. Some on the other hand do beleive it is a
>> necessary condition. We have yet to detemrine that it is a violation
>> of law, or to what degree it is a violation of law. Exactly what
>> is the violation of law: the full name, an infixx/suffix/prefix
>> usage, a typo based defintion? Are they all violations of law? If so
>> please someone shows us this law and the specifics that support these
>> broad interpretations.
>> Kiran Malancharuvil/Jim Bikoff (IOC):We have provided a lot of
>> guidance on these questions, but are waiting for the GC to answer the
>> questions as no one seems to take the organizations' word for it.
>> Incidentally, it is not just that we don't "believe" that a showing
>> of actual harm is a necessary condition, but rather that the law does
>> not require such a showing.
>> Kiran Malancharuvil/Jim Bikoff (IOC):+1 Ricardo
>> Debra Hughes:I encourage the group to consider that this chart
>> doesn't capture domain names that were obtained from third parties or
>> subject to previous enforcement action; also the harm ifor RCRC is
>> the allocation of resources (personal/financial) to manage abuses
>> that should not have been allows under the GC in the first instance.
>> Avri Doria:The law may not require it in some specific case or
>> uses. And it may not require it for some IGO/INGO etc... Are you
>> claiming that the Law exempts the necessary showing of harm in ICANN
>> policy for all usages and all IGO/INGO?
>> Avri Doria:Whatever Law protects, the law protects. For the rest
>> policy must determine what is or is not necessary for special
>> protection. Harm may be a necessary element for policy.
>> Kiran Malancharuvil/Jim Bikoff (IOC):I would refer you back to the
>> laws cited by each individual organization in question to answer your
>> questions.
>> Claudia MacMaster Tamarit:Agree with Mary
>> Avri Doria:For anyting that is law determined, the local law must
>> be enforced on the Registry or Registrar. Policy is only required
>> for those things not covered by law, or the same law, in localities
>> for which there is a law.
>> Kiran Malancharuvil/Jim Bikoff (IOC):What are we asking for that is
>> not covered by law? That question can only be answered to the
>> group's satisfaction by the GC.
>> Kiran Malancharuvil/Jim Bikoff (IOC):and even then, maybe not to
>> the group's satisfaction.
>> Avri Doria:Ok, so no one is asking for anyting not coverd by Law?
>> Claudia MacMaster Tamarit:I disagree.
>> Avri Doria:so why is this not a legal case?
>> Kiran Malancharuvil/Jim Bikoff (IOC):No one? I believe I've made
>> it clear (at your request) that I only represent the IOC.
>> Kiran Malancharuvil/Jim Bikoff (IOC):We have cited the law for
>> every position that we take. Speaking ONLY for the IOC.
>> Avri Doria:so the issue is relevant to the policy group. i thought
>> yu were maintaing that the issue was not important becasue of the law.
>> Kiran Malancharuvil/Jim Bikoff (IOC):you have misunderstood.
>> Avri Doria:I beleive any Registry or Registra that is beaking their
>> national law vis a vis IOC should be taken to court. We are not
>> about the nefocement of law, that is for the courts.
>> Kiran Malancharuvil/Jim Bikoff (IOC):that is an interesting view,
>> thanks for sharing it.
>> Nathalie Peregrine:Sam Paltridge has joined the AC room
>> Avri Doria:Kieren, you are quite welcome. ICANN is not LEA, it is
>> a policy organization that attempts to provide a refulatory function
>> based on a multistakeholder process of policy development.
>> Avri Doria:s/refulatory/regulatory/
>> Kiran Malancharuvil/Jim Bikoff (IOC):(*Kiran) - ICANN is required
>> to follow applicable laws.
>> Avri Doria:Kieran, and I am sure they will once those laws have
>> been cleary shown. Of course, the Registrars and Registries are in
>> different jurisdictions, so there is alwasy a question of which law,,
>> and which interpretation of the law must be followed.
>> Kiran Malancharuvil/Jim Bikoff (IOC):(*Kiran - no "e") - looking
>> forward to the GC response.
>> Avri Doria:apologies for my spelling.
>> Avri Doria:Kiran, I look forward to it as well.
>> Avri Doria:I've got my bets down on a verdict of 'no applicable law
>> determining the illegality of the use of a string in a domain name."
>> but i am not a lawyer and I often lose my bets.
>> Claudia MacMaster Tamarit:Support Mary's discussion
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):Fully support the comments just made by
>> Ricardo - indeed important that we continue to bear in mind in our
>> deliberations that IGOs are a distinct and limited category of entity
>> with names and acronymsprotected under internatinal law- and the
>> quantum of the discussions fromsome years agao have been materailly
>> impacted by ICANNs decision to massively expand the DNS, which adds
>> weight to the need to revisit ICANN decisions of past years.
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):fruit salad
>> Claudia MacMaster Tamarit:If some organizations can rely on per se
>> reservation of thier names on the basis of existing legal
>> protections, then there is no need for criteria for them. We can
>> spend our time discussing criteria for other IOs.
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):fully agree with claudia
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):+1 Claudia
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):...and again very with the spirit of the
>> intervention just made by ricardo
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):wrong, Alan
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):GAC proposal is for criteria and list
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):it is not supposed to be a closed list,
>> it's based on specific objective criteria
>> Avri Doria:I actually beleive that is ok to come up with a list
>> that is broader than the GAC's, if that is the right thing to do.
>> And if we are talking about things like clearing houses, challenges
>> and dispute resolution, i think it may even be possible.
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):right, it may need to be reviewed from
>> time to tim - and in particular, criteria based on .int eligibility
>> criteria + IGO funds and programs plus a list of a number IGOs which
>> have been identified as meeting those criteria
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):names AND acronyms
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):For IGOS in the GAC, IGO name plus acronymn
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):Under the Paris convention, it is the
>> name and acronymn which the IGO has communicated to the 6ter list
>> Claudia MacMaster Tamarit:The name should be protected in law,
>> e.g., under trademark law or other national statutes.
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):Just as an analagous example,
>> protections already granted under the reserve list for UN Member
>> countries, are protected in the UN languages
>> wolfgang:what do you do if two lorgs have the same acronym: IOC is
>> International Olympic Committeee ande the Intergovernmental
>> Oceanographic Commission.
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):correct, David
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):neither can be registered by third parties
>> Kiran Malancharuvil/Jim Bikoff (IOC):@Wolfgang - I see that you
>> have made this argument and given this example many many times in the
>> past. Again, to be crystal clear, the IOC does not seek protection
>> for acronyms. Thanks.
>> Claudia MacMaster Tamarit:Mary1
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):anyway, possibiliy for cooexistence
>> should not of itself be a reason not to preclude third party
>> registration of domains that would be an exact match of an IGO name
>> or acronymn
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):in practice, we are talking here about a
>> pool of hundreds of domain names that could correspond in this exact
>> way, as against the virtually limited number out there ,
>> especially in an expanded DNS
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):the Olympic Charter specifically mentions
>> that the IOC is an international, non-governmental organization whose
>> members are NATURAL persons
>> Claudia MacMaster Tamarit:Greg, ISO (the International Organization
>> for Standardization) is an INGO, and one of the some 140 NGOs with
>> General Consultative Status with the UN ECOSOC
>> Claudia MacMaster Tamarit:I believe the IEC is also a formal member
>> of the group.
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):more impirtant to get it right, than get
>> it early!
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):absolutely
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):anybody = third parties
>> Mary Wong:A large majority of NCUC members would oppose blocking.
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):absolutely
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):my "absolutely" was to David's remark
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):what I said was "anybody=third parties"
>> Kiran Malancharuvil/Jim Bikoff (IOC):We agree with that proposal,
>> Thomas
>> wolfgang:I oppose blocking as well
>> Mason Cole:oppose blocking
>> Avri Doria:i oppose all blocking.
>> Lanre Ajayi:I also oppose blocking
>> Avri Doria:whereas i support curative processes.
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):no curative processes for UPU (and other IGOs)
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):exact matches based on blocking third
>> party registration of IGO names and acronmyns other than with IGO
>> consent would work - IGO consent to allow for potential cases of
>> legitimate use
>> Avri Doria:i also suppor a recommendaion that induces specific
>> regisries o voluntarily block. i would recommend ha regisries
>> consider voluntary blocking.
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):+1 David
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):we need to bear in mind we are talking
>> of blocking tghe smallest handful of domain names potentially
>> availble in the DNS overall
>> Mason Cole:need to ring off -- thanks everyone
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):comparable in some ways to country names
>> and territories
>> Avri Doria:there is blocking and there are exclusive reservations.
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):prevention against sthird party
>> registration may be better than blcoking - IGOs mayh also want to use
>> their own names or acronmys
>> Mary Wong:@David, it would have to be that type of justification
>> (and of that magnitude/level) to justify any form of blocking.
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):exactly Thomas
>> Mary Wong:+1 to Claudia's suggestion - building on Avri's point on
>> voluntary blocks by registries, it could be a good balance of
>> interests here.
>> Claudia MacMaster Tamarit:.NGO would be one example would be one
>> TLD where INGOs would be particularly wary.
>> Mary Wong:@Claudia, that's what I was thinking too.
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):I have to leave in a couple of mins, thanks
>> to all
>> wolfgang:I have to leave in five minutes.
>> wolfgang:w
>> Kiran Malancharuvil/Jim Bikoff (IOC):Thanks.
>> Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):thank you Thomas
>> Mary Wong:Thanks, as always, Thomas and everyone!
>> David Roache-Turner (WIPO):thanks all
>> Nathalie Peregrine:thank you!
>>
>> * * *
>>
>> This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential
>> and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error,
>> you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by
>> reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do
>> not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to
>> any other person. Thank you for your cooperation.
>>
>> * * *
>>
>> To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform
>> you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax
>> advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is
>> not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the
>> purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or
>> applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or
>> recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.
>>
>> Disclaimer Version RS.US.20.10.00
>
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: robin at ipjustice.org
> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20130225/964716f9/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list