[gnso-igo-ingo] Affiliation amendment

[Julia Charvolen <julia.charvolen@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear All,



Please find the MP3 recording of the IGO-INGO Protections Policy Development 
Process (PDP) Working Group  teleconference held on Wednesday 28 November 2012  
at 1500 UTC at:



http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-20121128-en.mp3



On page: 
http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#<http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#sep>nov



The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master 
Calendar page:

http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/




Attendees:
Donna Austin – AusRegistry
Lanre Ajayi - Nominating Committee Appointee
Jim Bikoff – IPC/IOC
Elizabeth Finberg – RySG
Alan Greenberg – ALAC
Ricardo Guilherme – RySG
Robin Gross – NCSG
Stephane Hankins - IPC
David Heasley – IPC/IOC
Evan Lebovitch – ALAC
David Maher – RySG
Kiran Malancharuvil – IPC/IOC
Osvaldo Novoa-ISPC
David Opderbeck - NCSG
Christopher Rassi – Red Cross
Thomas Rickert – NCA
Gregory Shatan – IPC
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit – Observer
David Roache-Turner - Observer
Liz Williams – Individual

Apology :
Chuck Gomes – RySG
Wolfgang Kleinwachter - NCSG
Iliya Bazlyankov – RrSG
Paul Diaz – RySG
Avri Doria – NCSG

ICANN Staff:
Margie Milam
Brian Peck
Berry Cobb
Julia Charvolen



** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **



Thank you.

Kind regards,

Julia Charvolen

For GNSO Secretariat



Adobe Chat Transcript:
 Berry Cobb:Welcome to the 28 NOV 2012 IGO-INGO Conference Call.
  Evan Leibovitch:hi all
  Margie Milam:hi
  Osvaldo Novoa:Hi
  Ricardo Guilherme (Universal Postal Union):hi all
  Julia Charvolen:Robin Gross joined the call
  Berry Cobb:Everyone has the ability to scroll the document on their own.
  Julia Charvolen:Liza Williams joined
  David Maher:re: protections - IF ANY
  David Maher:I object to considering these questions  before we discuss the 
overarching question of whether there should be any protections.
  Liz Williams:@David +100
  Elizabeth Finberg:I agree with David.  The first ad foremost consideration is 
one of policy--not implemenation.
  Berry Cobb:I will send a word doc out to the list, so that Redline features 
may be used
  Liz Williams:The approach goes way to far ahead with the presupposition the 
principle of whether there should be any protections.  If the answer is no, 
then no work is required.
  Elizabeth Finberg:+1
  Liz Williams:it is not "regarding them in the abstract".  There are 
international treaties and law in place already that give protections.  why 
would we seek additional protections (which would be mandatory for registries 
to adopt) which are outside international law.
  Liz Williams:Could I suggest that we do a straw poll to assess the response 
to David's suggestion?
  David Opderbeck:I agree with Robin's comment.
  David Maher:@ Robin +1
  Ricardo Guilherme (Universal Postal Union):Totally disagree with Robin's 
comments, as several arguments have already been presented on the insufficiency 
of RPMs, not to mention the necessity to apply international law
  Liz Williams:It means dealing with "(ii) whether there is a need for special 
protections at the top and second level in all gTLDs for the names of the 
following types of international organizations: International Governmental 
Organizations (IGOs) and international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) 
receiving protections under treaties and statutes under multiple jurisdictions, 
and specifically including the Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement (RCRC) and the 
International Olympic Committee (IOC),...
  Ricardo Guilherme (Universal Postal Union):ICANN is not supposed to trample 
on such internationally binding statutes - the main thing here is to ensure 
that any such policies are in line with those statutes
  Osvaldo Novoa:I think there is a clear position in the GAC, supported by the 
Board, to grant the protections.  If we don`t do accept that and try to 
implement them, the Board will do it by itself.
  David Maher:There is no trampling on "binding statutes" Such statutes do not 
exist.
  Ricardo Guilherme (Universal Postal Union):They do: they are called 
internatinoal treaties
  Ricardo Guilherme (Universal Postal Union):international
  David Maher:THe Board is supposed to accept the policy decisions made by a PDP
  David Maher:The treaties do not bind ICANN to give protection to domain names.
  Ricardo Guilherme (Universal Postal Union):they absolutely do - ICANN is not 
outside the scope of international and domestic law - its bylaws just reiterate 
this basic fact
  Liz Williams:and why aren't those problems resolved in the same way as is 
currently done now?
  David Maher:This is a legal question on which we disagree.
  Osvaldo Novoa:I think that what David just wrote is the issue.  Since the 
treaties don't bind ICANN the GAC understands there is a need to have a policy 
that will do that
  David Maher:Exactly
  Ricardo Guilherme (Universal Postal Union):ICANN is not a party to a treaty 
for the basic reason that it is not a country or IGO - this is totally 
different from not being "subject" to international and domestic law, because 
it definitely is
  Ricardo Guilherme (Universal Postal Union):so if ICANN needs to enact its own 
policy to confirm that, no problem - what is problematic is to have policy that 
goes against established law
  Osvaldo Novoa:Sorry but I am not a lawyer, but I think that the idea is to 
prevent the registration of domains that might affect the legal rights of 
certain international organizations, the law protects them but after the fact 
and the idea is to have  measures that prevent that from happening.
  Elizabeth Finberg:We need to consider the need for protection of OGOs/ONGOs 
against the need to protect the internet as whole
  Elizabeth Finberg:INGOs
  Greg Shatan:I don't think it is a matter of "against" -- I think that 
protections of IGOs/INGOs in this regard do protect "the internet as whole" 
(whatever that is exactly...)
  Elizabeth Finberg:by that I mean that the internet is a public resource and 
we should take care before erecting barriers at the expense of due process
  Liz Williams:The bias is easy to remove.  We need to take a straw poll as to 
whether additional protections are required.  Everyone has read the documents 
and knows the issues and risks associated with this issue.
  Liz Williams:Once that question is answered, you can then move to a 
discussion of implementation advice (which isn't policy) to think about any 
additional systems.
  Liz Williams:If there is no consensus about the first question then we advise 
the ICANN Board of that finding.  It may or may not require more work.  This is 
the point of a bottom up policy devleopment process.
  Ricardo Guilherme (Universal Postal Union):+1 Greg
  David Roache-Turner:+2 Greg
  Thomas Rickert:I have to close the queue now!
  Thomas Rickert:After Alan that is!
  David Maher:That's why the UDRP was created
  David Maher:We are not sayiing that
  David Maher:The IRT/STI dealt with that question
  David Maher:How can you prove a negative?
  Alan Greenberg:Perhaps wortwhile noting that full blocking (with some 
excemptions) of a name (INGO/IGO or any TM) is completely possible and withing 
current rules. The only issue is the cost.
  Greg Shatan:Sorry, which question did the IRT/STI deal with, and can you 
provide some more specific citation (document, section and/or page)?
  Ricardo Guilherme (Universal Postal Union):+1 David Roache
  David Maher:IRT/STI developed what are now the RPMs in the current Applicant 
Guidebook
  Greg Shatan:There's nothing inherently impossible (or even difficult) in 
proving a negative.  See, e.g.
  Greg 
Shatan:http://departments.bloomu.edu/philosophy/pages/content/hales/articles/proveanegative.html
  Greg Shatan:It's really a question of proving (or providing support for) a 
position or point of view.  "You can't prove a negative" is a charming 
statement, but not true (or even relevant).
  Donna Austin, AusRegistry:1900 UTC is 4am in Melbourne
  Ricardo Guilherme (Universal Postal Union):doodle would be good
  David Roache-Turner:+1 ricardo on timing
  Donna Austin, AusRegistry:sorry 1900 is 6am in melbourne, so ik