Comments from in-house counsel, IFC

["Gordon I. Myers" <Gmyers@xxxxxxx>]

I am Chief Counsel, Technology and Private Equity, of the International 
Finance Corporation (?IFC?).   IFC, a member of the World Bank Group, is 
an international organization established by Articles of Agreement among 
its 184 member countries, which collectively determine our policies.  IFC 
is the largest global development institution focused exclusively on the 
private sector in developing countries.  Please note that I am responding 
in my personal capacity.

I concur with my colleagues at the International Bank for Reconstruction 
and Development that the recent GNSO recommendations fail properly to take 
into account public policy concerns, the unique status and needs of IGOs 
under international law, and in my understanding, longstanding and 
repeated GAC advice to ICANN.  These recommendations, while accepting 
preventative protections for full names at both the top and second levels, 
do not grant such protections for IGO acronyms.  The recommendation does 
not take into consideration that many if not most IGOs are known by both 
their acronyms and full names.   UNICEF, and the UN itself, as well as 
IFC, are well-known examples of such commonly known acronyms.  As a 
result, abuse and fraud in connection with these acronyms is a significant 
risk to the public mission of these IGOs.   The need for preventative 
protection of IGO acronyms at both levels, in addition to protection for 
full names, therefore is evident. 

In the event that ICANN declines to follow consistent GAC advice to the 
Board to also ensure preventative protections to IGO acronyms, then the 
proposals made by the GNSO Council to provide access to the Trademark 
Clearinghouse do not offer adequate protection.  Simply allowing IGOs 
access to the existing Clearinghouse or dispute resolution fora for their 
acronyms does not meaningfully reduce the risks posed to IGOs in the gTLD 
program.  In fact, for various reasons (immunities, lack of financial 
resources, etc.) not all IGOs have registered their names or acronyms as 
trademarks under national laws. At a minimum, the Trademark Clearinghouse 
should extend its current scope of protection to the IGO names and 
acronyms listed on the GAC's "IGO List dated 22/03/2013". Such protection 
would need to be granted for up to two official or working languages per 
IGO, and regardless of whether the name and acronym are registered as 
trademarks in certain countries  or not.  In other words, no further 
clearance of these acronyms should be required, and no registration or 
annual fee should be charged for the inclusion of IGO acronyms in the 
Clearinghouse. 
To summarize, it is unfortunate that at a time when ICANN?s engagement 
strategy professes to seek to evolve ICANN?s working relationship with 
governments and IGOs, the GNSO Council appears to be failing to 
acknowledge the special needs and circumstances of international 
organizations. I sincerely hope that the ICANN Board will not follow this 
same route.
I appreciate your consideration of this matter.
Very truly yours,
____________________________________________________________________________________________

Gordon I. Myers 
Chief Counsel, Technology and Private Equity 
IFC Legal Department 
2121 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 
Washington, DC 20433 
Tel: +1 (202) 473-1728 Fax: +1 (202) 974-4362 Cell: +1 (202) 294-6785 
E-mail: Gmyers@xxxxxxx Web: www.ifc.org Skype Me: gim5129 

IFC is a member of the World Bank Group

Reduce your environmental footprint. Print only if necessary.