[NCSG-Discuss] Should NCSG consider filing an ombudsman complaint against ICANN senior staff for violating the organization's policy development process?

[joy]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

+1 - I am happy to support this idea.
Joy

On 27/03/2013 9:47 a.m., William Drake wrote:
> +1
> 
> Get some allies
> 
> On Mar 26, 2013, at 8:28 PM, Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu 
> <mailto:Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> wrote:
> 
>> I agree that the Council would be the appropriate filer in this 
>> case. As I mentioned in a different message, there seems to be a 
>> pattern that decisions are being made outside the GNSO policy 
>> processes - although that may be proven to not be the case in
>> one or more of the instances we've discussed on this list. In
>> any event I think it would be useful and appropriate for the
>> Council to discuss this directly, and hope our Councilors can
>> support this action. It seems to me also that before introducing
>> the motion it may be worth investigating whether a Councilor from
>> a different SG/House would be prepared to second it.
>> 
>> Cheers Mary
>> 
>> 
>> Mary W S Wong Professor of Law Faculty Chair, Global IP 
>> Partnerships Chair, Graduate IP Programs UNIVERSITY OF NEW 
>> HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA 
>> Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu <mailto:mary.wong at law.unh.edu> 
>> Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: 
>> http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php
>> 
>> 
>>>>> 
>> *From: *  Avri Doria <avri at ACM.ORG <mailto:avri at ACM.ORG>> *To:*
>>  <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU 
>> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>> *Date: *  3/26/2013 3:23 
>> PM *Subject: *  Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Should NCSG consider filing
>> an ombudsman complaint against ICANN senior staff for violating
>> the organization's policy development process?
>> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> I can support the NCSG filling such a complaint, though it would 
>> be better for the GNSO Council to file it.
>> 
>> Perhaps we can first introduce it as a motion for the next 
>> g-council meeting, and if the council decides against it, then
>> we could do it independently.
>> 
>> avri
>> 
>> On 26 Mar 2013, at 15:14, Robin Gross wrote:
>> 
>>> I think NCSG should consider filing an ombudsman complaint 
>>> against
>> the organization's senior management for violating the 
>> organization's policy development process by adopting staff's 
>> "strawman solution" which never went through proper process (or 
>> any process for that matter).
>>> 
>>> The most dangerous part of staff's adopted proposal creates
>> unprecedented new rights for trademark holders with this "once 
>> infringed" theory of new rights to TM+50 derivations of that 
>> mark. This particular proposal was stitched together by TM 
>> lobbyists and staff when NCSG wasn't even in the room - because 
>> it was 10pm at night in LA and I had left for my flight on 
>> staff's assurances that no policy discussions would take place 
>> that evening.  ALAC wasn't in the room either (although Evan & 
>> Alan participated remotely on the phone in the middle of their 
>> night).
>>> 
>>> The GNSO Council said don't adopt this policy.
>>> 
>>> ICANN staff admitted the proposal was a policy decision and
>>> not an
>> implementation decision - a key distinction in staff's ability
>> to make decisions. [Although the first time staff published its 
>> report on the mtg's discussion of that proposal, staff's blog 
>> report differed from what the CEO stated to meeting participants 
>> and said this proposal had been characterized as an 
>> "implementation" decision by mtg participants.  It took some 
>> persistence and insistence from mtg participants to correct 
>> staff's blog post and classify this proposal as "policy" - which 
>> was the truth of what the LA mtg participants had said.  Finally 
>> staff gave-in, as I was not the only one to complain about the 
>> inaccurate reporting, and they changed the web-posting to
>> reflect that the group - and staff - had classified this proposal
>> as "policy, and not implementation" at the LA mtg.  The CEO 
>> apologize for staff's "mistake".  I'm sure it's all another 
>> coincidence...]
>>> 
>>> The CEO told Congress only a few weeks' previously that ICANN 
>>> could
>> not adopt such a policy - in part because it creates new rights 
>> (and ICANN isn't supposed to creating new rights).
>>> 
>>> The above doesn't even go into the underlying substance of the
>> particular (TM+50) proposal (which turns trademark law on its 
>> head). How is anyone going to criticize a company or product
>> that was "found to abused" by someone else, somewhere else, in
>> an entirely unrelated circumstance?  This proposal actually
>> thumbs its nose at trademark law because trademark law recognizes
>> that "once infringed" does not create some magical new category
>> of rights that is allowed to trample on the expression rights of
>> all the innocent and lawful uses of a word (that resembles a 
>> trademark).  But I'll save the complaints about how nonsensical 
>> the substance of this proposal is for another email.  This email 
>> is just about the insanity of ICANN senior staff attempting to 
>> usurp the bottom-up policy development process to appease 
>> powerful political interests.
>>> 
>>> If ICANN staff refuses to follow the organization's own stated
>> policies, the Ombudsman is supposed to be able to intercede, no?
>>> 
>>> Best, Robin
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 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 
>>> <http://www.ipjustice.org/>     e:
>> robin at ipjustice.org <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRUhj4AAoJEA9zUGgfM+bq1RcIAL+/1U69GY6VyFvxK1HCDNR1
YzJZgRDYvNLl2B8f8koyvzutRbEEoGUBsDqyU42ZEoMX9rw/XSGMuC5zKFKTZ6Yp
QL7/OXJNKW24rqUb4SrXf763ilONgSzZdWud41a5yPb7PA/y/N0M0+wZmpntASK+
ukmWJpV46Qg7C2Z8tk1fY+uLkBM9X6OAPUQaYItr52Yi5rn6YSz2ofPp8xi9B7r6
oR6qQnXcFvcbGmilZpc/gMoFf8ZhqjfthDnlbWFXkCxFO4npXFky8espPD3rbMvE
Cay+ao9oq7W9J7vF9A7ss+Zw4FjP+7bGHg3QYUS92Kl3y6KOD8j052rC7PLEZU8=
=1KI4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----