<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: RCRC views regarding protection at the second level
- To: "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>, "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Hughes, Debra Y." <Debra.Hughes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: RCRC views regarding protection at the second level
- From: "Shatan, Gregory S." <GShatan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 09:58:24 -0500
As I read it, "denomination" simply means the names Red Cross, Red Crescent,
Red Lion and Sun, or Red Crystal -- why use a one syllable word when a five
syllable word will do? :-)
After taking a quick look at Article 53 of the First Geneva Convention and some
related commentary, it appears that an "imitation," placed in the context of
the work of this group, would be a string that would be confusingly similar to
one of the "denominations", such as the "recrosssociety" example cited below.
I think the GAC request goes beyond protection of exact matches -- the final
bullet point on page 2 of the proposal specifically states that the Olympic and
Red Cross terms should receive "consideration during the String Similarity
review."
Greg
________________________________
From: owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 11:18 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck; Hughes, Debra Y.; gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: RCRC views regarding protection at the second
level
I'm not at all sure what "any denomination" or "an imitation thereof" mean, but
the GAC Q&A was quite clear that what was being requested was only exact
matches of the strings and their translations.
But perhaps best to leave the 2nd level issues in abeyance this week...
Alan
At 28/02/2012 04:49 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
Thanks Debbie. This is very helpful to me.
I have concerns though about the following in the next to last
paragraph: "Any registry receiving a request of registration of a second-level
domain should therefore have an automatic system by which the request for
registration of any denomination from the list or an imitation thereof should
raise a red flag, requiring the registry to check whether the user is
legitimate." An automatic system is possible if there is a list of names that
are excluded. But when I see words like "any denomination" or "an imitation
thereof", I don't know how that can be automated. Similarly, how could a
similarity test be done?
Chuck
From: owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx [
mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx> ]
On Behalf Of Hughes, Debra Y.
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 2:15 PM
To: gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RCRC views regarding protection at the second
level
Dear colleagues,
1. As a follow-up to Jeff's email, we would like to share our views in
regards to the use of Red Cross and Red Crescent denominations within
second-level names.
2. The 1949 Geneva Conventions are binding for virtually all States:
194 in total. In addition to the Conventions themselves, the national
legislation of the States party to the Conventions make it a criminal offence
to use the names "red cross", "red crescent" and "red lion and sun" unless they
are used by legitimate users; the 2005 Third Additional Protocol also added a
new name and emblem, called the "red crystal". Virtually all States of the
world are therefore under the same legal regime of the Geneva Conventions,
which prohibits the use of these denominations, but also of their "imitations",
to use the terminology of the First Geneva Convention (Article 53).
Therefore, any use of these denominations (or an imitation of those) is
illegal and may result in criminal prosecution at national level, unless they
are used by any of the components of the International Red Cross or Red
Crescent Movement, including its international bodies (the International
Committee of the Red Cross or the International Federation of Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies) or any of the National Red Cross or Red Crescent Societies.
There are very few exceptions in which under a national context a "non-Red
Cross user" can use the name, because of certain uses of the term that predated
the enactment of national legislation, such as "Red Cross salt" in the US, but
none of these exceptions applies internationally, and new exceptions are no
longer possible.
It is worth mentioning that this debate is not taking place in the
context of trademarks: as surprising as it may seem, the use of the
denominations "red cross", "red crescent", "red crystal" and "red lion and sun"
are not merely subject to trademark. As we noted above, the use of these
denominations for the Red Cross/Red Crescent is protected by criminal laws.
Even in regards to the above-mentioned exceptions, the use of the name "Red
Cross" would not result in the payment of royalties to the Red Cross by these
grandfathered users. The interests at stake relate to the protection of war
victims and our humanitarian mission-related activities, not about commercial
issues. This issue is not about defending trademark rights, but ICANN's
compliance with criminal laws in the 194 States, including the US, for which
the Geneva Conventions are binding.
3. In practice, the Red Cross/Red Crescent frequently face issues
related to the abuse of their name and identity in second-level domain names.
For instance, a couple of weeks ago, a scammer registered a domain name called
"recrosssociety" under an existing gTLD, and that site was used to divert
money. This required legal action to be started, in order to have the
second-level domain name removed or at least "emptied" from its contents by the
registry. The Red Cross/Red Crescent would prefer to use the monies that are
generously donated to assist the worldwide communities the Movement serves and
not have to reallocate resources to address fraud.
4. The 1949 Geneva Conventions do not distinguish between languages:
although the first version of the Applicant's Guidebook included a list of
names in the six UN official languages, to limit the prohibition to those
languages does not make sense: the prohibition must prevail, in a given
country, for all languages commonly used in that country. As a consequence,
because domain names apply on a transnational level, the prohibition must apply
to all languages, as a rule.
Of course, we understand that, for practical purposes, the work of
registries could be tremendously facilitated by having a list of the
above-mentioned denominations in the languages which are the most frequently
used on the Internet (around one hundred languages would probably cover about
99% of the world population). Any registry receiving a request of registration
of a second-level domain should therefore have an automatic system by which the
request for registration of any denomination from the list or an imitation
thereof should raise a red flag, requiring the registry to check whether the
user is legitimate. Failing this, the application should be refused in order to
ensure the respect of existing norms of international humanitarian law, and
ensure that the registry is also complying with national legislation.
We are actively working with our member Societies worldwide in order to
know which languages will be relevant for their respective context. As agreed,
we will do our utmost to produce such a list before the ICANN Board meeting in
Costa Rica.
Best regards,
Debra Hughes (American Red Cross)
Christophe Lanord (International Federation of Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies)
Stéphane Hankins (International Committee of the Red Cross)
Debra Y. Hughes
Senior Counsel
American Red Cross
2025 E Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20006
202.303.5356 (p)
202.303.0143 (f)
Debra.Hughes@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[] []
This electronic message transmission contains information from the
Office of General Counsel of the American Red Cross and may be confidential or
privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or
entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any
disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is
prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please
notify me immediately by telephone 202.303.5356 or by e-mail at
Debra.Hughes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx and delete this e-mail message from your computer.
Thank you.
* * *
This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may
well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice
of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete
this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any
purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your
cooperation.
* * *
To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that,
unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in
this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to
be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under
the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2)
promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters
addressed herein.
Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03
pdc1
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|