RE: [gnso-igo-ingo] RCRC Comments on the WG IGO/INGO template

["Shatan, Gregory S." <GShatan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think that is what this PDP was created to establish.

As to whether what the IOC is asking is "beyond the law", I'll let those more 
familiar with the IOC legal landscape respond.  However, I think your 
understanding of the different laws is incorrect (and I think the IOC has 
provided access to documents that confirm this).  

In the United States, the Olympic trademarks protected by U.S. statute (36 
U.S.C. 220506(c)) include: the name "UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE"; the 
symbol of the International Olympic Committee, consisting of five interlocking 
rings; the words "Olympic, " "Olympiad" and "Citius Altius Fortius," and also 
the words "Paralympic," "Paralympiad," "Pan-American" and "America Espirito 
Sport Fraternite," or any combination of these words; the emblem of the United 
States Olympic Committee, consisting of an escutcheon having a blue chief and 
vertically extending red and white bars on the base with five interlocking 
rings displayed on the chief; and the symbols of the International Paralympic 
Committee and the Pan-American Sports Organization, consisting of a torch 
surrounded by concentric rings.  I am fairly confident that the laws of a 
number of jurisdictions are similar.

As for exceptions, we can find ways of dealing with them without throwing the 
baby out with the bathwater.  In the IOC/RCRC DT, we proposed a process where 
other rights-holders could seek the ability to register strings that fell 
within the IOC or RCRC ambit (e.g., Olympic paint and Red Cross bandages, if 
memory serves).

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Novoa, Osvaldo
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 8:46 AM
To: 'Avri Doria'; gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-igo-ingo] RCRC Comments on the WG IGO/INGO template


All,
I think in this case what they are asking, at least the IOC, is beyond the law. 
 I also am not a lawyer, but I have heard several times that in the case of the 
IOC the different laws prevent the use of the symbol, not the name.  And we all 
know that Olympic and several variations of the name in several languages, are 
being use by commercial entities with no relations to the IOC.  Can we prevent 
these entities from using their own brand just because is reserved for the IOC? 
 If they are using it we must suppose that they have the legal right to do it.
I am not so sure about the RCRC.
If we include all the IGO and INGO then the problem is huge.
I think we need a PDP to establish a general criteria for the protection of IGO 
and INGO brands in order to prevent us from having to analyze each case 
individually, and if some kind of protection is needed it should be the minimum 
necessary.
Best regards,
osvaldo

-----Mensaje original-----
De: owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx] En 
nombre de Avri Doria Enviado el: Viernes, 30 de Noviembre de 2012 11:05
Para: gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx
Asunto: Re: [gnso-igo-ingo] RCRC Comments on the WG IGO/INGO template


Hi,

True, in fact the GNSO has made policy recommendations in the past that 
specified that laws provided and exception to the policy - something that was 
perhaps made necessary by contracts such as the RAA.

In this instance, one of the things I have asked for periodically has been 
evidence of court case rulings where the specific words that the IOC or RCRC is 
seeking to protect have won the protections they are demanding.  I agree with 
David that this is not a precedent for policy, but it would go some distance in 
substantiating the legal arguments that haver been presented in this 
discussion.  At this point, I beleive we are just being presented with one 
side's legal argument.  A judges ruling, e.g., that the name Olympic could not 
be used on the Internet by anyone for any purpose, would indeed be helpful.

Perhaps as a non lawyer I do not understand, but i tend to see one side's 
arguments as interesting and maybe even persuasive, but certainly not 
determinative of anything.

avri


On 30 Nov 2012, at 16:27, Gomes, Chuck wrote:

>
> I would add once again something I have said before: if there are clear and 
> definitive laws that protect IOC & RC names as well as certain IGO names, 
> then ICANN staff simply needs to enforce registry agreements because 
> registries are required to follow applicable laws. A policy could be 
> developed to facilitate compliance with laws, but it would not be totally 
> necessary.
>
> Chuck
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-igo- 
>> ingo@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
>> Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 4:42 AM
>> To: gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [gnso-igo-ingo] RCRC Comments on the WG IGO/INGO 
>> template
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I support this position.
>>
>> And would add that prior decisions by the Board and the GAC have no 
>> binding influence on the procesess or recommendations of the GNSO.
>> Certainly should be considered as part of the informational flow, but 
>> this is a bottom-up process and as such directives from above have no 
>> special merit making them more important than other community input.
>>
>> Part of the reason we are stuck in the position is because at every 
>> step of the way, various parties have tried to trump the GNSO policy 
>> process by appealing to Authority.  It is time for that appeal to be 
>> dropped in favor of genuine participation in the PDP process.
>>
>> Getting back to law.  If something is indeed illegal, then take it to 
>> the appropriate court for action.
>>
>> avri
>>
>> On 30 Nov 2012, at 05:55, David W. Maher wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I reiterate my position that the special protection of the Red Cross
>> and Red Crescent, if any, should be based on policy issues related to 
>> humanitarian considerations, and not based on legal considerations. 
>> The laws referred to below do not have anything to do with ICANN's 
>> procedures for the registration of domain names.
>>> David W. Maher
>>> Senior Vice President - Law & Policy Public Interest Registry
>>> 312 375 4849
>>>
>>> From: Stephane Hankins <shankins@xxxxxxxx<mailto:shankins@xxxxxxxx>>
>>> Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 06:54:05 -0500
>>> To: THOMAS RICKERT 
>>> <rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>>,
>>> "gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx>"
>>> <gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx>>,
>>> "gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx>"
>>> <gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx>>
>>> Cc: "christopher.rassi@xxxxxxxx<mailto:christopher.rassi@xxxxxxxx>"
>>> <christopher.rassi@xxxxxxxx<mailto:christopher.rassi@xxxxxxxx>>
>>> Subject: [gnso-igo-ingo] RCRC Comments on the WG IGO/INGO template
>>>
>>> Dear Thomas, dear Berry, dear all,
>>>
>>> (1) Further to yesterday's call, please find attached, the "Red 
>>> Cross
>> and Red Crescent" comments on the WG IGO/INGO Template distributed 
>> yesterday in track changes. As indicated during the call, we 
>> recommend that the wording "international organisations" be 
>> maintained throughout the document, as it will better allow to 
>> encompassall concerned organisations, thus including the 
>> international components of the the International Red Cross and Red 
>> Crescent Movement which are considered to enjoy a distinct status 
>> under international law. The latter stems in particular from the 
>> ICRC's enjoyment of international mandates conferred upon it by the 
>> treaties of International Humanitarian Law, the observer status 
>> recognized to the International Committee of the Red Cross and the 
>> International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies in 
>> the UN GA, the participation of the components of the Movement in the 
>> International Conferences of the Red Cross and Red Crescent, in which Sta!
>> te!
>>> s participate, the Headquarters Agreements concluded by the ICRC and
>> the International Federation with many States and acknowledging inter 
>> alia the Organisations' diplomatic priviliges and immunities.
>>>
>>> It should also to our mind be made clear in the template that the WG
>> will require to examine and to take into due account also all 
>> distinctive grounds substantiating the requirements for the 
>> protection and reservation of the designations of the IO's under 
>> consideration and which would complement the affiliation of the said 
>> names to any given organisation. This should allow to fully and 
>> comprehensively reflect the global public interest in their 
>> protection. As recalled during yesterday's call, the words "Red 
>> Cross" and "Red Crescent" designations require to be protected, as 
>> stipulated under international law treaties, in their own right as 
>> the designations of the protective emblems of armed forces medical 
>> personnel in times of armed conflict (and not only, or exclusively, 
>> as part of the names of the respective components of the 
>> International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, whether those of 
>> the International Committee of the Red Cross, International Federation of 
>> Red Cr!
>> os!
>>> s and Red Crescent Societies, Afghan Red Crescent or American Red
>> Cross).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> (2) As a second point, we also wish to take this opportunity to
>> emphasize, and thus following certain argumentspresented during the 
>> yesterday's call, that the protection of the Red Cross, Red Crescent 
>> and Red Crystal and related designations is not being grounded or 
>> called for out of "sympathy" for the Red Cross and Red Crescent or 
>> for its humanitarian roles, but because the protection of these names 
>> stems and is a requirement under universally agreed international 
>> norms of international humanitarian law (194, soon to be 195 States 
>> partiesto the 1949 Geneva Conventions).
>>>
>>> (3) We take this opportunity to attach the Position Paper which we
>> submitted to the Board on 13 June 2012. There are also, as 
>> participants in the former Drafting Group on IOC/RC will recall, a 
>> series of other past submissions of the RCRC shared since the beginning of 
>> this year.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> With best regards,
>>>
>>> Stéphane J. Hankins
>>> Legal adviser
>>> Cooperation and coordination within the Movement International 
>>> Committee of the Red Cross Tel (direct line): ++0041 22 730 24 19
>>>
>>> Christopher M. Rassi
>>> Senior Legal Officer
>>> International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies 
>>> Chemin des Crêts, 17|1209 Petit Saconnex |Geneva|Switzerland Tel. 
>>> +41
>>> (0)22 730 4536 | Fax +41 (0)22 733 0395
>>>
>> =====================================================================
>> =
>>> ========= The ICRC - working to protect and assist people affected 
>>> by
>> armed conflict and other situations of violence. Find out more:
>> www.icrc.org This e-mail is intended for the named recipient(s) only.
>> Its contents are confidential and may only be retained by the named 
>> recipient (s) and may only be copied or disclosed with the consent of 
>> the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). If you are not 
>> an intended recipient please delete this e-mail and notify the sender.
>> =====================================================================
>> ==
>> ========
>>>
>>
>
>
>



El presente correo y cualquier posible archivo adjunto está dirigido únicamente 
al destinatario del mensaje y contiene información que puede ser confidencial. 
Si Ud. no es el destinatario correcto por favor notifique al remitente 
respondiendo anexando este mensaje y elimine inmediatamente el e-mail y los 
posibles archivos adjuntos al mismo de su sistema. Está prohibida cualquier 
utilización, difusión o copia de este e-mail por cualquier persona o entidad 
que no sean las específicas destinatarias del mensaje. ANTEL no acepta ninguna 
responsabilidad con respecto a cualquier comunicación que haya sido emitida 
incumpliendo nuestra Política de Seguridad de la Información


This e-mail and any attachment is confidential and is intended solely for the 
addressee(s). If you are not intended recipient please inform the sender 
immediately, answering this e-mail and delete it as well as the attached files. 
Any use, circulation or copy of this e-mail by any person or entity that is not 
the specific addressee(s) is prohibited. ANTEL is not responsible for any 
communication emitted without respecting our Information Security Policy.