ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-igo-ingo]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[gnso-igo-ingo] TR: NCSG Input Statement on the Protection of IGO and INGO Identifiers in all gTLDs (IGO-INGO)

  • To: "gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [gnso-igo-ingo] TR: NCSG Input Statement on the Protection of IGO and INGO Identifiers in all gTLDs (IGO-INGO)
  • From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 00:36:19 -0800


On behalf of (De) : Robin Gross
Envoyé : lundi 11 février 2013 01:05
À : gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Gery
Cc : NCSG-Policy Policy; Thomas Rickert
Objet : NCSG Input Statement on the Protection of IGO and INGO Identifiers in 
all gTLDs (IGO-INGO)

Dear Glen & Thomas,

Please see the attached Input statement from NCSG for contribution to the 
working group.  Thank you for the opportunity to provide input into this policy 
issue.

Best,
Robin



Begin forwarded message:


From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:Glen@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date: January 16, 2013 7:21:17 AM PST
To: Robin Gross <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Cc: Brian Peck <brian.peck@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:brian.peck@xxxxxxxxx>>, Berry Cobb 
Mail <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>, 
"gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx>" 
<gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: Reminder: Input requested for PDP on the Protection of IGO and INGO 
Identifiers in all gTLDs (IGO-INGO)


Reminder !
The GNSO Council is looking to expedite this PDP to accommodate requests from 
the ICANN Board and GAC.  As part of its efforts to obtain input from the 
broader ICANN Community, at an early stage of its deliberations, the IGO-INGO 
Protections Working Group tasked with addressing this issue is looking for any 
input or information that may help inform its deliberations. You are strongly 
encouraged to provide any input your respective communities may have by 
providing it to the GNSO Secretariat 
(gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>) by 15 
January 2013.



Please inform us whether you will be sending a statement and when it can be 
expected.



Thank you very much.

Kind regards,



Glen



Glen de Saint Géry

GNSO Secretariat

gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

http://gnso.icann.org



De : owner-gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx] De la part de Glen de Saint Géry
Envoyé : vendredi 7 décembre 2012 21:32
À : Robin Gross
Cc : Brian Peck; Berry Cobb Mail; 
gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx>
Objet : [gnso-secs] Input requested for PDP on the Protection of IGO and INGO 
Identifiers in all gTLDs (IGO-INGO)





Dear Robin,

The PDP Working Group on the Protection of IGO and INGO Identifiers in all 
gTLDs (IGO-INGO) would appreciate the NCSG’s input through the attached  Input 
Template also in text below:
Thank you.

Kind regards,



Glen



Stakeholder Group / Constituency / Input Template

Protection of IGO and INGO Identifiers in all gTLDs Working Group



PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR RESPONSE AT THE LATEST BY 15 January 2013 TO THE GNSO 
SECRETARIAT 
(gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>), 
which will forward your statement to the Working Group.



The GNSO Council has formed a Working Group of interested stakeholders and 
Stakeholder Group / Constituency representatives, to collaborate broadly with 
knowledgeable individuals and organizations, in order to consider 
recommendations in relation to the protection of names, designations and 
acronyms, hereinafter referred to as “identifiers”, of intergovernmental 
organizations (IGO’s) and international non-governmental organizations (INGO’s) 
receiving protections under treaties and statutes under multiple jurisdictions.



Part of the Working Group’s effort will be to incorporate ideas and suggestions 
gathered from Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies through this template 
Statement.  Inserting your response in this form will make it much easier for 
the Working Group to summarize the responses for analysis. This information is 
helpful to the community in understanding the points of view of various 
stakeholders. However, you should feel free to add any information you deem 
important to inform the Working Group’s deliberations, even if this does not 
fit into any of the questions listed below.



For further information, please visit the WG Webpage and Workspace:

 *   http://community.icann.org/display/GWGTCT/
 *   http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/protection-igo-names.htm



Process

-        Please identify the member(s) of your Stakeholder Group / Constituency 
who is (are) participating in this Working Group

-        Please identify the members of your Stakeholder Group / Constituency 
who participated in developing the perspective(s) set forth below

-        Please describe the process by which your Stakeholder Group / 
Constituency arrived at the perspective(s) set forth below



Below are elements of the approved charter that the WG has been tasked to 
address:

As part of its deliberations on the first issue as to whether there is a need 
for special protections for IGO and INGO organizations at the top and second 
level in all gTLDs (existing and new), the PDP WG should, at a minimum, 
consider the following elements as detailed in the Final Issue Report:



•        Quantifying the Entities whose names  may be Considered for Special 
Protection

•        Evaluating the Scope of Existing Protections under International 
Treaties/Laws for the IGO-INGO organizations concerned;

•        Establishing Qualification Criteria for Special Protection of  names 
of the IGO and INGO organizations concerned;

•        Distinguishing any Substantive Differences between the RCRC and IOC 
designations from those of other IGO-INGO Organizations.



Should the PDP WG reach consensus on a recommendation that there is a need for 
special protections at the top and second levels in all existing and new gTLDs 
for IGO and INGO organization identifiers, the PDP WG is expected to:



•        Develop specific recommendations for appropriate special protections, 
if any, for the identifiers of any or all IGO and INGO organizations at the 
first and second levels.

•        Determine the appropriate protections, if any, for RCRC and IOC names 
at the second level for the initial round of new gTLDs and make recommendations 
on the implementation of such protection.

•        Determine whether the current special protections being provided to 
RCRC and IOC names at the top and second level of the initial round of new 
gTLDs should be made permanent for RCRC and IOC names in all gTLDs; if so, 
determine whether the existing protections are sufficient and comprehensive; if 
not, develop specific recommendations for appropriate special protections (if 
any) for these identifiers.



Questions to Consider:



1.      What kinds of entities should be considered for Special Protections at 
the top and second level in all gTLDs (existing and new)?



Group View:



2.      What facts or law are you aware of which might form an objective basis 
for Special Protections under International Treaties/Domestic Laws for IGOs, 
INGOs as they may relate to gTLDs and the DNS?



Group View:



3.      Do you have opinions about what criteria should be used for Special 
Protection of the IGO and INGO identifiers?



Group View:



4.      Do you think there are substantive differences between the RCRC/IOC and 
IGOs and INGOs?



Group View:



5.      Should appropriate Special Protections at the top and second level for 
the identifiers of IGOs and INGOs be made?



Group View:



6.      In addition, should Special Protections for the identifiers of IGOs and 
INGOs at the second level be in place for the initial round of new gTLDs?



Group View:



7.      Should the current Special Protections provided to the RCRC and IOC 
names at the top and second level of the initial round for new gTLDs be made 
permanent in all gTLDs and if not, what specific recommendations for 
appropriate Special Protections (if any) do you have?



Group View:



8.      Do you feel existing RPMs or proposed RPMs for the new gTLD program are 
adequate to offer protections to IGO and INGOs (understanding that UDRP and 
TMCH may not be eligible for all IGOs and INGOs)?



Group View:



For further background information on the WG’s activities to date, please see:



•        Protections of IGO and INGO identifiers in all gTLDs web page (see 
http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/protection-igo-names.htm).

•        Protection of International Organization Names Final Issue Report, for 
insight into the current practices and issues experienced (see 
http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/protection-igo-names-final-issue-report-01oct12-en.pdf).

•        The IOC/RCRC DT page is also a good reference for how those efforts 
were combined with this PDP (see 
http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/red-cross-ioc.htm).






Glen de Saint Géry

GNSO Secretariat

gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

http://gnso.icann.org





IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: 
robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>


Attachment: NCSG_IGO-INGO_Input_Request_FINAL.pdf
Description: NCSG_IGO-INGO_Input_Request_FINAL.pdf

Attachment: IGO-INGO_Input_Request_SG-C_v1.0.doc
Description: IGO-INGO_Input_Request_SG-C_v1.0.doc



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy