RE: [gnso-igo-ingo-qc] RE: Qualification Group - Initial Draft - Please Comment

["Claudia MACMASTER TAMARIT" <MACMASTER@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Thomas,

I can.  I’ll add the all the criteria in the spreadsheet this morning and send 
it back as soon as possible.

Thanks,
Claudia

From: owner-gnso-igo-ingo-qc@xxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-gnso-igo-ingo-qc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Thomas Rickert
Sent: 2012-12-18 22:53
To: Kiran Malancharuvil
Cc: gnso-igo-ingo-qc@xxxxxxxxx; Jim Bikoff; David Heasley
Subject: Re: [gnso-igo-ingo-qc] RE: Qualification Group - Initial Draft - 
Please Comment

Hi Kiran,
understood.

Claudia, can you put your suggestions into the spreadsheet?

If not, may I ask Berry to incude them in the spreadsheet so that he group has 
as many criteria in the document as habe been proposed?

Thanks,
Thomas

=============
thomas-rickert.tel
+49.228.74.898.0

Am 18.12.2012 um 22:42 schrieb Kiran Malancharuvil 
<kmalancharuvil@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:kmalancharuvil@xxxxxxxxx>>:
Hi Thomas and all,

We are happy to work on and explore these additional lists of criteria.  With 
the holidays coming up, many members of our group will be out of the office, 
starting this week.  Because of that, we can’t explore, research and present 
these additional 15 items by tomorrow, nor can we commit to any specific time 
during the holidays.

Thanks,

Kiran


From: Thomas Rickert 
[mailto:rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx]<mailto:[mailto:rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 3:26 PM
To: Claudia MACMASTER TAMARIT
Cc: Kiran Malancharuvil; 
gnso-igo-ingo-qc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-qc@xxxxxxxxx>; Jim Bikoff; 
David Heasley
Subject: Re: [gnso-igo-ingo-qc] RE: Qualification Group - Initial Draft - 
Please Comment

Group members,
thanks Kiran for sending the first version of the spreadsheet and Claudia for 
your additional remarks.

You are right, all arguments and proposed criteria should to into the 
spreadsheet to make it easier for the group to determine where it wants to go.

I recollect that Evan also submitted criteria earlier to the list. I have 
copied those below:


  *   What is the charitable status of the organization in the countries in 
which it operates?
  *   What is the current incidence of fraudulent or misleading domains related 
to the organization?
  *   Does the organization work and communicate directly to the public, or 
rather through affiliates, governments and partners?
  *   Does the organization, or its subsidiaries, engage in ad-hoc domain 
creation to deal with unforeseen needs (ie, disaster relief)
  *   Does the organiozation currently use a domain under .int?


May I ask you to try to put them (maybe rephrased to make it fit) into the 
spreadsheet and fill out the spreadsheet. I am sure that we will then have 
quite a good basis for our discussion tomorrow.

Thanks,
Thomas


Am 18.12.2012 um 20:33 schrieb "Claudia  MACMASTER TAMARIT" 
<MACMASTER@xxxxxxx<mailto:MACMASTER@xxxxxxx>>:



Dear all,

First, may I suggest we add other criteria to this worksheet?   At the moment, 
the excel chart gives the impression that we are only considering 5 criteria 
(protection by treaty, protection by national law, protection in 30 
jurisdictions, serving the public good, and whether the organization can use 
RPMS).

These criteria (if cumulative) express a bias towards narrowing the eligibility 
pool dramatically without any defined objective justification for any 
protection in domain names.  It seems they are tailored to protect only certain 
(in many cases already-identified) organizations without objective 
justification.

If the aim is to protect organizations that receive legal protections in order 
to carry out recognized public good, I strongly urge the group to add other 
criteria which do not instantly single out certain organizations, such as the 
following (as previously suggested);

1.       Number of member countries in the international organization;
2.       Percentage of governmental or public members in the international 
organization;
3.       Number of countries in which the international organization has 
operations or provides services and/or products;
4.       Nature and impact of work, services and/or products on an 
international level;
5.       Nature and extent of collaborations with governments and other 
international organizations;
6.       Status of international organization under international and/or 
domestic law;
7.       Duration of international organization’s existence;
8.       Status of the international organization as a non-profit institution 
and/or operating in the public interest;
9.       Recognition/use of name or acronym with/by the international 
organization;

10.   Number and extent of existing abusive domain name registrations relating 
to the name or acronym.
Obviously these criteria can be subject to debate, which I believe is the 
purpose of this worksheet.

I also object to collapsing the columns under "Connection of Identified Harm to 
the National Law" in the first row under the headers.  This does not allow for 
comments regarding any thoughts to the connection between the aspect of any 
organization protected under treaty law and protection as a second and first 
level domain, e.g., should protection of the graphical representation of the 
Olympic rings mean protection of particular text on the second or first level.

Several other comments are included in the attached.  I apologize for the 
brevity of my comments, and look forward to tomorrow’s discussion.

Sincerely,
Claudia


From: owner-gnso-igo-ingo-qc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-igo-ingo-qc@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-gnso-igo-ingo-qc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-qc@xxxxxxxxx>] On 
Behalf Of Kiran Malancharuvil
Sent: 2012-12-17 22:39
To: gnso-igo-ingo-qc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-qc@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jim Bikoff; David Heasley; Thomas Rickert 
(rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>)
Subject: [gnso-igo-ingo-qc] Qualification Group - Initial Draft - Please Comment

Dear Qualification Criteria Group Members,

Please find an initial draft of our group spreadsheet.  We’ve completed a large 
part of this form, and made some changes to the format to account for the 
unique protections provided to each entity.  Please provide comments, 
especially with respect to fields left blank, by close of business on Tuesday, 
December 18, 2012 (EST) so we can forward the draft to the group.

As this is the first group email, please confirm receipt.

Thank you for your input!

Best regards,

Jim, David and Kiran

Kiran J. Malancharuvil
Silverberg, Goldman & Bikoff, L.L.P.
Georgetown Place
1101 30th Street NW, Suite 120
Washington, DC 20007
(202) 944-3307 – office
(619) 972-7810 – mobile
kmalancharuvil@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:kmalancharuvil@xxxxxxxxx>

This message from the law firm of Silverberg, Goldman & Bikoff LLP may contain 
confidential or privileged information. If you received this transmission in 
error, please call us immediately at (202) 944-3307 or contact us by e-mail at 
kmalancharuvil@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:kmalancharuvil@xxxxxxxxx>. Disclosure or use of 
any part of this message by persons other than the intended recipient is 
prohibited.



<ISO IGO-INGO-Working-Tool_v1 0 - Qualification Group Changes (2).xlsx>

___________________________________________________________
Thomas Rickert, Rechtsanwalt
Schollmeyer &  Rickert Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft m.b.H. (i.e. law firm)
Geschäftsführer / CEO: Torsten Schollmeyer, Thomas Rickert
HRB 9262, AG Bonn

Büro / Office Bonn:
Kaiserplatz 7-9, 53113 Bonn, Germany
Phone: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 0

Büro / Office Frankfurt a.M.:
Savignystraße 43, 60325 Frankfurt, Germany
Phone: +49 (0)69 714 021 - 56

Zentralfax: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 66

mailto: rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>
skype-id: trickert
web: www.anwaelte.de<http://www.anwaelte.de>