Re: [gnso-igo-ingo] Protections for INGO names

["David W. Maher" <dmaher@xxxxxxx>]

Plz see response below
David W. Maher
Senior Vice President ­ Law & Policy
Public Interest Registry
312 375 4849 




On 4/30/13 4:25 PM, "Thomas Rickert" <rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
>All,
>as you know, we have gained momentum around a proposal and a series of
>protection recommendations of identifiers for the IOC, RCRC, and IGOs.
>From the onset it became clear that all four groups had to be considered
>individually given the varying nature of the organizations in question.
>
>Some of you have reminded me and the group that the INGO designations are
>not covered by the RySG proposal, which has been the basis of our recent
>discussions. 
>
>To complete our charter and work effort, it is now time for the WG to
>continue deliberations on protection of INGO identifiers and the
>following is an effort to determine the level of support by the WG.
>Please provide responses to the mail list with the following aspects to
>consider:
> 
>1)      Is there general support by WG members for protecting certain
>INGOs?
DWM: I oppose special protection of INGOs other than IOC and RCRC. The
protection of INGOs should be based solely on whatever protection they can
claim as holders of trademark rights.
>2)      If so, what qualification criteria should be used?
DWM: N/A
>3)      If qualification criteria were defined, would the proposed INGO
>protection align to our current proposals of the IGO, IOC, and RCRC
>organizations?
DWM: Even if some criteria were defined (and I do not support the idea), I
do not believe there could be any alignment with our current proposals.
> 
>We can certainly base our discussions on the findings of our previous
>work, but it is my impression that no proposal on criteria for INGOs has
>been made so far that got substantial traction. Please use this
>opportunity to take this forward and please do come up with concrete
>language for proposals that the group can then discuss.
>
>Thanks,
>Thomas 
>