Re: [gnso-iocrc-dt] List of possible approaches for Red Cross/IOC names in new gTLDS

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

One obvious oversight.  There was also some support for the changed option 5.

avri


On 24 Jul 2012, at 15:34, Avri Doria wrote:

> 
> hi,
> 
> I forwarded this email to the NCSG discuss list.
> 
> The conversation is still ongoing.
> 
> In terms of the questions, I got one recommendation for a change to question 
> 5:
> 
> "
> International law firm "to conduct a legal analysis to substantiate/verify 
> whether there is clear evidence of treaty law and/or statutes that would 
> require registries and registrars to protect IOC and RCRC names by law."
> 
> Not ICANN legal counsel.  Tender for an international legal firm (consortium 
> of legal scholars?) to conduct analysis (there's about $357m in the TLD 
> moneybox)
> "
> 
> For the most part people have been giving their opinion on the options.
> 
> I would say that the overwhelming support is for option 1, with a little 
> support for 3 and for 4.
> 
> This is based on opinions in the email thread and not on a poll, vote or 
> judgement by the NCSG policy committee.
> 
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> On 18 Jul 2012, at 17:08, Brian Peck wrote:
> 
>> In response to the request during the last RC/IOC DT call, please find below 
>> a list of possible approaches that have been proposed to date for moving 
>> forward in responding to the GAC proposal to protect the RCRC and IOC names 
>> at the second level in new gTLDS:
>> 
>>      • Maintain the status quo and not provide any new special protections 
>> for the RCRC/IOC names (i.e., no changes to the current schedule of 
>> second-level reserved names in the new gTLD Registry Agreement).
>>      • Develop recommendations to implement the GAC proposal such as 
>> extending protection to all or a subset of RCRC names only, all or a subset 
>> of IOC names only or, to both sets of each organization’s names.
>>      • Consider the proposal to not provide any new protections now and wait 
>> to see if any additional protections may be necessary after the delegation 
>> of the first round new gTLD strings and/or consider lowering costs for each 
>> organization to utilize RPMs ( i.e., Thomas Rickert’s proposal)
>>      • Consider possible additional protections for the RCRC/IOC as part of 
>> a broader PDP on the protection of names for international organizations
>>      • Ask ICANN General Counsel’s office to conduct a legal analysis to 
>> substantiate/verify whether there is clear evidence of treaty law and/or 
>> statutes that would require registries and registrars to protect IOC and 
>> RCRC names by law.  
>> 
>> Please let us know if you have any questions or need anything further at 
>> this time.  Thanks.
>> 
>> Best Regards,
>> 
>> Brian 
>> 
>> Brian Peck
>> Policy Director
>> ICANN
> 
> 
>