COMMENTS FROM WHO ON GNSO'S RECOMMENDATIONS ON IGO-INGO IDENTIFIER PROTECTIONS

["STREIJFFERT GARON, Chantal" <streijffertch@xxxxxxx>]

Dear Ms Wong,

On behalf of Gian Luca Burci, Legal Counsel of the World Health Organization 
(WHO), please take note of the following comments.

WHO would like to echo the comments posted by the United Nations Office of 
Legal Affairs on 12 December 2013 and further comments posted by INTERPOL on 17 
December 2013 AND OECD on 18 December 2013.

The IGO-INGO Identifier Protection recommendations adopted by the GNSO Council 
on 27 November 2013 are of great concern to WHO, in particular the 
recommendation to  refuse protections for IGO acronyms in the Domain Name 
System (DNS). Therefore, WHO wishes to add its voice to many other 
inter-governmental organizations that have expressed similar concerns on this 
important issue.

IGOs have indicated on many occasions that our intention is not to prevent in 
absolute terms good faith use of our acronyms in the DNS by third parties. 
Rather, IGOs are looking for solutions to pre-empt third-party abuse of our 
acronyms to prevent user confusion and the resulting loss of confidence in both 
IGOs and the DNS. WHO believes that at the second level, reasonable 
co-existence principles and a simple and cost-neutral process could be devised 
and the PDP could have explored such mechanisms, so a blanket refusal to 
protect IGO acronyms was not warranted. In addition, we believe that IGOs 
considerations have been ignored throughout this process and that there is 
currently certainly no consensus on the matter.

We would like to recall one of the "core values" ICANN Board of Director's Code 
of Conduct: "7.  Employing open and transparent policy development mechanisms 
that (i) promote well-informed decisions based on expert advice, and (ii)  
ensure that those entities most affected can assist in the policy development 
process."

It is important to recall that ICANN's founding documents require ICANN to 
carry out its activities in conformity with relevant principles of 
international law and applicable international conventions, to cooperate with 
relevant IGOs and to duly take into account governments' and public 
authorities' recommendations, recognizing that public authorities are 
responsible for public policy.

The GAC repeatedly advised that IGOs, as entities created by governments under 
public international law, are in an objectively different category to other 
rights holders and that there is a prevailing global public interest to provide 
special preventative protections for IGO names and acronyms at both the top and 
second levels.

WHO therefore urges ICANN to adopt a policy that will protect IGOs in the same 
manner afforded to the RCRC and the IOC; namely, the placement of their names 
and acronyms in the Applicant Guidebook section 2.2.1.2.3, Strings; Ineligible 
for Delegation; for both top level and second level domain names. Surely, IGOs 
deserves to be treated at least on a par with these other organizations.

Sincerely yours.