[gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Adobe Connect - Chat Transcript from International Olympic Committee and Red Cross Names - 22 August 2012

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Nathalie,

With regard to our top level recommendations, what I recall is that we 
suggested that there be an exception procedure and that we mentioned some 
possible ways of doing that but we never tried to reach consensus on any one 
procedure.  If I am wrong on that, please correct me.

Chuck

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-
> dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Nathalie Peregrine
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 3:08 PM
> To: gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Cc: gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-iocrc-dt] Adobe Connect - Chat Transcript from
> International Olympic Committee and Red Cross Names - 22 August 2012
> 
> 
> 
>   Brian Peck:GNSO RCRC/IOC Drafting Team Meeting Agenda 22 August, 2012
>   Alan Greenberg:Will be free earlier than expected so will be on call.
>   Kiran Malancharuvil:Nathalie, David Heasley is also on the call.
> Thanks!
>   Nathalie  Peregrine:Noted, thank you Kiran!
>   Kiran Malancharuvil:Alan, quick question, it is my understanding that
> inclusion of the IOC/RC in the PDP related to second round protections
> and did not bind the issue of protection for the IOC/RC in the first
> round to a PDP.  I asked this question during the working session in
> Prague, and I thought that was Brian's point.
>   Debra Hughes:can i get in the cue?
>   Thomas Rickert:You are in the cue, Debra!
>   Kiran Malancharuvil:Alan - what is the rationale for excluding the
> IOC from protection?  Is there a legal basis for that exclusion?
>   Nathalie  Peregrine:Greg Shatan sends his apologies for today's call
>   Alan Greenberg:No, it is not based on a legal review.
>   Kiran Malancharuvil:I would like to renew the argument that the IOC
> has made in the past , that regardless of any personal sentiment about
> the IOC, the protections are based on law, and both the IOC and the RC
> have legal bases on which the GAC has based protection.
>   Alan Greenberg:Regarding other protection mechanisms, I beleive that
> the UDRP is only TMs, but the URS explicitly includes treaty-based
> protections
>   Alan Greenberg:My personal position is similar to that proposed by J
> Scott.
>   Debra Hughes:Not to mention the incertainty we discussed related to
> the new gTLD rights protection mechanisms -- the status quo is
> problematic
>   Alan Greenberg:Isn't the "exception" process at its core, a letter of
> approval from the IOC/RC?
>   Kiran Malancharuvil:not at all Alan, if you recall the first level
> recommendations, the exception procedure included options for a letter
> of nonobjection and also any independant showing of legitimate interest
> to ICANN.
>   J. Scott Evans:Kiran, that's my recollection too.
>   Alan Greenberg:We may still need an "appeal" to an independent body,
> but I agree with Chuck that we don't need to do that now.
>   Kiran Malancharuvil:why can't we use the same mechanism we applied
> for the first level?
>   Kiran Malancharuvil:That question can and will be addressed in the
> PDP.  That doesn't eliminate the option of taking 3(a) subject to 5.
>   Kiran Malancharuvil:by "that question" I mean Chuck's point about
> whether IGO protections are the same as protections of the IOC/RC
>   J. Scott Evans:yup