[gnso-igo-ingo] MP3 IGO-INGO Protections Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group - 8 May 2013

[Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear All,

The next call for the IGO-INGO Protections Policy Development Process (PDP) 
Working Group is scheduled on Wednesday, 15 May 2013 at 16:00 UTC. but this 
will be confirmed.

Please find the MP3 recording of the IGO-INGO Protections Policy Development 
Process (PDP) Working Group teleconference held on Wednesday, 8 May 2013 at 
1600 UTC at:
http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-20130508-en.mp3
On page: 
http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#<http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#feb>may

The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master 
Calendar page:
http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/

Attendees:
Lanre Ajayi - NCA
Jim Bikoff - IPC/IOC
David Heasley - IOC
Avri Doria - NCSG
Elizabeth Finberg - RySG
Chuck Gomes - RySG
Alan Greenberg - ALAC
Stephane Hankins - NCSG
David Maher - RySG
Kiran Malancharuvil - IPC/IOC
Christopher Rassi - Red Cross
Thomas Rickert - NCA -Working group chair
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit - ISO
David Roache-Turner - WIPO
Mason Cole - GNSO Council vice chair - RrSG
Evan Leibovitch - ALAC
Judd Laufer - IOC replacing Kiran Malancharuvil
Wolfgang Kleinwächter - NCSG
Wilson Abigaba - NCSG
Greg Shatan - NCA
Debra Hughes - NCSG
Apologies:
Mary Wong - NCUC
Osvaldo Novoa - ISPCP
Guilaine Fournet - (IEC)

ICANN Staff:
Berry Cobb
Brian Peck
Marika Konings
Glen de saint Géry

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

Thank you.
Kind regards,
Glen

Adobe Chat Transcript 8 May 2013

Berry Cobb:Welcome to the 8 May 2013 IGO-INGO Conference Call.

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):greetings to all

  Alan Greenberg:long wait on bridge today...

  Chuck Gomes:I am on the call as well

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):yes, same here

  Alan Greenberg:3 minutes ...

  Judd Lauter (IOC):James Bikoff and David Heasley are on the call

  Alan Greenberg:on now

  Mason Cole:sorry to be late...waiting for operator

  Glen de Saint Gery:Jim Bikoff  and David Maher have just joined

  Mason Cole:On the line now

  Evan Leibovitch:Hi there. I just came on the call but now find an personal 
issue forces me to step away for about 20 minutes. Back then.

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):We have already expressed our serious 
concerns with a reserved list of terms (including ISO) where longstanding 
rights owners have to ask permission from an IGO to use their trademark name.  
Removing terms (like ISO or words/names/country codes) from registration at the 
top level, except with a rigorous progress unimposed on other rights holders is 
simply, from our view, unacceptable.

  Alan Greenberg:That PRESUMES that they are added to today's reserved names 
list as opposed to some new mechanism with exceptions built in.

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):That's right Alan.

  Avri Doria:UYes, is a new special reserved names list and mset of policy 
mechansmms were established then, the RESP would not be necessary.  I am very 
much against the creation of a new reserved names list of set of mechanisms.

  Avri Doria:... if a new ...

  Avri Doria:Exactly, there is NO International law that forces a particlar 
policy decision.What weneed to determine is whehter there is bottom-up support 
for various policies.

  Avri Doria:totaly support the seperation of RCRC and IOC dyad.

  Avri Doria:The GAC is not an International Legal authority.

  Avri Doria:It is one stakeholder among many, and its ADVICE is important but 
not binding.

  wolfgang:We are moving in circles. It is indeed not a legal issue, it is a 
political question and a case whether the GAC or the Board has the final word.

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):+1 Greg

  Alan Greenberg:sorry was cut off

  Avri Doria:I think they are unecessary at the top level.

  Avri Doria:and i am against doing it.

  Alan Greenberg:i can hear

  Avri Doria:they already are excluded becasue of similarity

  Avri Doria:to existing names ccTLD

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Yes Alan you are correct.

  David Roache-Turner:which is precisely why we need a reasonable mechanism 
based on objective criteria for scalable consent in appropriate cases

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):particularly since we are talking about a VERY 
limited number of IGO names and acroyms - to assume that this would be overly 
complex is not correct

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):complex to manage under ICANN, I mean

  David Roache-Turner:+1 ricardo - we need to keep the discussion in proportion

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Alan, some of the points you raise is exactly 
why we are opposed to a consent based mechanism.  But also removing a term that 
happens to be our trademark and name from possible registration without 
possibly considerable and undue expense and process.

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):As for the IO, it's obvious that international 
law/domestic statutes cannot be subject to one person's decision - the mandate 
provided to the IO is extremely limited in this regard

  David Roache-Turner:As for cost and process, initial reservation of IGO names 
+ acronyms at both levels with a mechanism to enable agreed use by IGOs or 
potentially legitimate third party users on objectives criteria should not 
involve a consent mechanism that is unduly complex  and preferably cost neutral 
to use. - provided consent is scalable in appropaite cases should also futher 
help to keepany need to use for legitimate users to a minimum, while also 
providing a measure of defacto protection for the concerned identifier or 
trademark of the third party

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):@Thomas: names AND acronyms, please

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):there is no difference under both international and 
domestic laws between the two things

  David Roache-Turner:+1 ricardo, absolutely right

  David Roache-Turner:whatever the scope of protection one would argue under 
6ter of the Paris convention in the DNS,. absolutely clear that it draws no 
distinction between protected full names and acronyms

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Also, it may be very difficult to seek legal 
recourse against an IGO where consent was not appropriately given.

  Avri Doria:It would not be the Applicant Support program, but something 
similar tailored to this issue

  Thomas Rickert:Yes, Avri. Sorry for not being precise on that.

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Agree with Alan.

  David Roache-Turner:On the top level, the GAC advice at least is very clear 
on protection at the top level for IGO names and acronyms agasint third party 
registration in any future rounds of new gtlds on public policy grounds.

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):once more: we are talking about little more than 200 
names/acronyms, NOT more than that. To assume that this is excessive for the 
purposes of ICANN reserved names is not reasonable, particularly given the 
almost infinite number of word/letter combinations for new gTLDs. Either we 
stick to existing legal principles or we risk moving to casuistic approaches

  Alan Greenberg:To be clear, if we end up with a situation where the Intl Stds 
ORd can not apply for .ISO, when we make inumerable references to ISO-3166, 
would be, in my mind, a joke.

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):speaking of jokes, one of the best examples is to put 
a pronoun owned by nobody on top of the World Health Organization

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):+1 to the list-based approach, plus a possible 
objective mechanism as referred to by David

  Avri Doria:Yeah but Tommy could object to .who as well.

  Evan Leibovitch:soory. back in

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Alan, we cannot overemphasize our concern 
about that kind of restriction, or a consent based model.  It doesn't reflect 
existing relationships among rights, and it doesn't reflect the real commercial 
and legal need and right to be able to use a trademark and name in a domain 
name (in which we in particular have more than 65 years of use, and extensive 
multinational trademark protection.)

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Not only do we actively use such domain names 
as our main  one, iso.org, but also several hundred variations.

  David Roache-Turner:I think his objection would be to "The Who", the band, 
not WHO, the IGO

  Avri Doria:Thanks you David, I will find a better example for next time, but 
i think the point stands.

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Should we be required to seek permission to 
register iso.standard (theoretically).  And we are not the only potential 
legitimate user of such acronyms, or even ISO.

  Avri Doria:i am glad to hear World Health would be ok with .thewho

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):But we've already presented these views in 
our joint ISO IEC proposal of last Friday.

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU): @Thomas: our views on TMCH are already presented in 
the email of today, so I won't extend myself further on this

  Thomas Rickert:Thanks, Ricardo! Understood!

  Avri Doria:n the first instanc ebing on the GAC list should qualify them as 
GAC-marked which could be sufficinet evidence.

  Avri Doria:Ie. some provide evidence of Trademark while others provide 
evidence of GACmark.

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):We indeed are interested.

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):@Mason Cole: so the Registrar opposition is merely on 
the basis of commercial interest on 200 strings out of an infinite number - 
legal rules/principles are totally set aside, it seems.

  David Roache-Turner:Commercial attractiveness of IGO names  as domain names 
really shouldn't be the driver for whether less than 200 IGO acronymns should 
be protected in the DNS, with an approrpiate mechanism to cover consent.

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):We have both a commercial interest and well 
established trademark rights to use and register ISO.

  David Roache-Turner:IGOs a renot commercial, but this could be covered by 
appropriate scalable consent so ISO (and  any other portentially legitimate 
user of an identifier corresponding to a protected IGO name or acronym) could 
be covered in appropriate cases.

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Again, we suggest the focus should be on 
actual reduction and prevention of cybersquatting.  Not impeding or restricting 
rights and legitimate interests..

  Alan Greenberg:Claudia +1

  Evan Leibovitch:"Iso" is also a Danish supermarket chain. It is absolutely 
unreasonable, from a public interest PoV, to support blocking acronyms

  David Roache-Turner:Claudia, fully agree - which is what reservation of IGO 
names + a reasonable, scalable consent mechanism should help acheive for those 
with identifiers covered by those on the llist

  Mason Cole:Ricardo, I think that's an unfair characterization to say it's 
based simply on an interst in money.  As I said, registrars have many customers 
who have legitimate interests in various acronyms, and we're looking for a 
balanced approach that keeps customer interest in mind.  As I've also said, I 
am working with the registrars to find common ground.  I hope that's been made 
clear.

  Alan Greenberg:The concept of some level of acronym protection is fine. But 
it MUST be done with recognition that many acronyms are not unique. So 
protection of a strings MUST be associated with how it will be used.

  Mason Cole:Registrars are quite sure, for example, many of their customers 
have uses for the "ISA" string beyond the exclusive remit of the International 
Seabed Authority

  David Roache-Turner:Alan, are there "many" such acronyms;  so far we have 
only seen a few conrete examples (such as ISO) which need to be workably 
addressed, but the challenge and any response perhaps needs to be seen in that 
relative light

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):David, we have some serious concerns about a 
consent based model, which we oppose.

  Alan Greenberg:Claudia +1

  David Roache-Turner:thanks Claudia, that's understood, just tyring to find 
workable compromise here.

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):@Thomas: we will take a look into those questions, 
thanks

  Thomas Rickert:Thx

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):@Thomas: one thing I can already express here, 
related to the RySG recommendation - there is NO basis for separation between 
acronyms and full names, and no legal justification for such; not to mention 
that MOST if not ALL IGOs on the Internet use their acronyms instead of full 
names as identifiers

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):David, I appreciate the spirit of compromise, 
including as an INGO which is requesting special protection itself.  However, 
we cannot underestimate the importance of truly workable and appropriate 
protections that reflect the existing complex landscape of multinational, 
national and international legal protections, including the subtleties of 
coexisting rights (and, preexisting rights).Again, we need to focus on avoiding 
cybersquatting of IO names, without creating greater rights or undue 
restrictions on existing rights.

  David Roache-Turner:lets take a look indeed, though at first blush a 
TMCH-like structure specifically for IGOs distinguishing the rights and scope 
from those which may be approrriate for commercial traemarks, and addressing 
other specific porblems such as duration and cost may be a potentially 
interesting idea, though it would seem to be significantly more complex than 
the preventive list-based approach with a simple, cost neutral mechanism to 
manage any coexistence which IGOs have been proposing and would clearly prefer 
to support

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):or do you really think that we are supposed to 
protect ".UnitedNationsConferenceonTradeandDevelopment" instead of ".unctad"? 
This would be more than ludicrous from a legal/public policy perspective.

  David Roache-Turner:+ 1 ricardo - IGO's use their acronmyns to identify 
themselves and that is where the real risk of confusion with their public 
missions lies

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):And to Evan, agree.  Our worry is about 
fradulent uses of ISO (which we deal with on a daily basis) not restricting 
other non-confusing and legitimate uses.

  Evan Leibovitch:UNCTAD is an obvious estreme example. So is UNICEF. But most 
three-letter acronyms have mutltiple uses and this whoul;d NOT be protectcable.

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):sorry but this is not a matter of length of strings - 
it's a matter of principle and conformity with international/domestic laws

  Evan Leibovitch:That's your opinion

  Avri Doria:Lets just admit that ICANN needs to define a new form of mark 
called GACmark - and then the TMCH pretty much works as it is designed to work. 
 the only change is to admission control.

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):Not mine, it is the opinion of countries when 
agreeing on international treaties and domestic laws

  Avri Doria:And who know, maybe acronyms can be listed within the TM+50

  Avri Doria:i mean GM+50

  Mason Cole:@Ricardo, if it were that easy, we wouldn't still be discussing 
it.  Nor would registrar customers have SADC.net for an alarm company website.  
The South African Development Community would already have that and other names

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):I know it, Mason - just reiterating the 
principles/rules. I don't mean to say that they are applied/respected in the 
DNS/by ICANN

  Evan Leibovitch:or need to be

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):@Avri: Sorry, what you mean by GM+50?

  Greg Shatan:TM+50 is limited to strings which have been the subject of a 
winning judicial or UDRP decision in favor of the brandowner, so it's unlikely 
that TM+50 would cover acronyms except by sheer coincidence.

  David Roache-Turner:IGOs are not seeking TM + 50, not least because the 50 
requires an ability to access the UDRP to obtain decisions finding confusing 
similaritym, which IGOs in general still dont have.

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):moreover, IGOs do NOT submit to domestic 
jurisdictions/courts

  David Roache-Turner:which is why any TMCH-like solution (or UDRP-like 
mechanism for IGOs) would need to address that aspect in particular, among 
others;  absolutely right ricardo.

  David Roache-Turner:Avri, just to be clear, IGOs are not the ones seeking TM 
equivalent protection;  we are  seeking protection appropriate for IGOs.

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):What would that mean for a consent based 
model.

  David Roache-Turner:Claudia, do you mean under a TMCH-like model?

  David Roache-Turner:its a right to register, exactly

  Mason Cole:all, i will be back in approx 10 minutes

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):dear all, I am gonna have to leave very soon. Look 
forward to continuing discussions by email

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):@Thomas: tks again for moderating this; we will come 
back with further considerations following these talks

  David Roache-Turner:Alan, just to clarify that IGOs don't have marks as such, 
they have protected names and acronyms which preclude certain others from 
registering trademarks in circumstances where these would suggest a connection 
with the protected IGO.

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):No, David.  I'm raising questions about the 
interplay between immunities and a consent based reserved listed.

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):list.

  Avri Doria:I acknowledge that my viewpoint is a minority postion.  There is 
uniwillingess in the NCSG on sunrise.  We will be discussing it further.

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):Claudia, this would either lead to bilateral 
negotiations, use of specific processes or, in the extreme situation and as 
agreed by the organizations concerned, arbitration

  Alan Greenberg:TMCH-like protection does not preclude further other 
protections, but let's take them one at a time.

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Thank you Ricardo.  It's good to think about 
this as well.

  David Roache-Turner:thanks Claudia for the clarification;  agree with Ricardo 
these would need to be resolved at first instance though, by a simple, 
cost-neutral, consent based process on objective criteria.

  David Roache-Turner:full-barbitration would indeed by for more extreme 
examples

  Alan Greenberg:I *LIKE* that term!  BARBITRATION!

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU)::)

  David Roache-Turner:meant full-blown, sorry, but thats indeed a good if 
mistaken creation of a word

  Alan Greenberg:Short for Barbarian-Arbitration!

  Alan Greenberg:Done with large clubs

  David Roache-Turner:Lets trya nd keep that at the gates!

  Evan Leibovitch:used in the UBRP

  David Roache-Turner:a barbitration would probably charge like a wounded bull

  Alan Greenberg:Good level on which to conclude this meeting chat.

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):it's always good to end with a laugh

  David Roache-Turner:indeed ;) need to sign off after Claudia concludes, with 
appologies for the early departure, and thanks  to all

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):Claudia's suggested text for INGOs seems to be in 
line with the higher flexibility that this group has to propose policy for 
these specific types of organizations - we will be glad to take a closer look 
at it

  Avri Doria:I find that Claudia's proposal could fit with my proposals.

  Avri Doria:For me IGO and INGO protections should be equivalent.

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):no, as the legal grounds are totally distinct

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):having said the above, Claudia's suggestions seem to 
be very sensible, provided they are applied on a non-discriminatory basis for 
ALL INGOs

  Evan Leibovitch:+1 Alan

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Thanks Alan, we agree.

  David Roache-Turner:+1 ricardo, though good to hear Avri appears not to have 
any objection to the scope of protection contemplated for INGOs

  Evan Leibovitch:It's about protection, not entitlement

  Evan Leibovitch:Which goes back to the previous issues about harm reduction

  Avri Doria:David, I support full objection and dispute resolution capablities 
for all IGO/INGO.

  Evan Leibovitch:As do I

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Thank you Greg.  For me and Guilaine, we took 
a very pragmatic approach, reflective of our very real daily concerns.

  Evan Leibovitch:ALAC has stated repeatedly that NGOs such as Oxfam and MSF 
are as vulverable, and is some cases moreso, than the IGOs arguing here for 
protection

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):We hope it's pragmatic, and we trust others 
will find ways to finetune

  David Roache-Turner:We should all strive for pragmatism here

  Avri Doria:Ican come back with tweaks  for INGO over the next week.

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):ample evidence has been shown of harm against IGOs - 
to delve into that or relativize the matter for IGOs is totally unnecessary

  David Roache-Turner:absolutely Ricardo

  Evan Leibovitch:The evidence is insufficient, on a blanket level

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):if we were to believe that, then we should conclude 
that t is insufficient for all

  Evan Leibovitch:OK

  David Roache-Turner:Evan, what evidence would you need in addition to that 
which we have already seen in this group?  The earlier report we saw of abuse 
was compelling, and likely on the tip of the iceberg.

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Agreed Avri.

  Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):bye/good night to all - tks for the exchanges

  Alan Greenberg:Wolfgang gave one example of a suitable list of INGO a LONG 
time ago

  David Roache-Turner:likewise all, goodnight, with thanks for the rich 
exchanges.

  Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Echoed fully.

  Greg Shatan:Agree with Avri

  Evan Leibovitch:@David: Some IGOs have problems with cybersquatting and 
fraud, some don't. some have acronyms with non-infringing acronyms, some don't. 
As I said, it's unreasonable on a blanket level.

  Evan Leibovitch:acronyms with non-infringing use

  Avri Doria:i will be at WTPF next week and will miss that call if it happens.


Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat
gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
http://gnso.icann.org<http://gnso.icann.org/>