[gnso-igo-ingo] Request for Confirmation

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

Hi Thomas and all,

We have spent quite some time discussing the importance of developing objective 
eligibility criteria.  Before we continue, we propose it is important to 
consider if there are any restrictions on that discussion embedded in the 
language of our Charter, and to ensure that any such restrictions be read in an 
unbiased and straight-forward way.  In other words, if there are eligibility 
criteria already included in the Charter, we need to agree their inclusion is 
appropriate and allow ample room for discussion to define them.

Charter:  Mission and Scope ("and")

We've already asked whether the wording of this WG's Charter is meant to 
restrict our considerations to both INGOs receiving protections under treaties 
and INGOs receiving protections under multiple jurisdictions, or INGOs in both 
categories.  We've suggested that requiring that INGOs receive protections 
under both categories to be eligible for special protections might be 
inappropriately restrictive.

Charter:  Mission and Scope ("protections")

Leaving that question aside, we should consider that the word "protection" in 
the Charter is quite broad and there is no inherent prioritization of some 
protections over others (or some treaties/statutes over others).

If that is the case, then presumably international organizations can point to 
the protections under treaties they receive for their names/acronyms, e.g., 
that are registered as international trademarks under the Madrid Agreement 
Concerning the International Registration of Marks or as well-known marks under 
the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property.  Likewise, many 
international organizations may rely on trademark registrations in more than 
one jurisdiction to qualify them as receiving protections under multiple 
jurisdictions.

On a plain reading of the language of our Charter, we would like to confirm 
that there are no hidden restrictions on the definition of "protection," e.g., 
that an organization be specifically named in the treaty or statute itself.

Objective Criteria Applied to an Objectively Defined Group

We propose we should make it clear now that if we are indeed bound to consider 
only international organizations that receive protection under treaties and 
multiple jurisdictions (whether or not this means "both") that the meaning of 
"protections" shall be sufficiently broad to enable us to determine and 
recommend truly objective criteria.


Sincerely,
Claudia


Claudia MacMaster Tamarit, Esq.
Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Manager

International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
ISO Central Secretariat
T:  + 41 22 749 0441
F:  + 41 22 733 3430
E:  macmaster@xxxxxxx<mailto:macmaster@xxxxxxx>
www.iso.org<http://www.iso.org/>