[gnso-iocrc-dt] Questions for Consensus Call - Reply due by September 26th

["Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

All,

As discussed on the last call, we now have the following two questions out for 
a consensus call so that we put these options out for public comment.  I know 
the Board's resolution from last week was sent to the group yesterday and 
although I encourage everyone to read that resolution and we will discuss it, I 
do not believe that that resolution should sway our path.  Please speak up if 
you disagree.  If anything, the Board's resolution may be in line with one of 
the recommendations that we, as a group are considering.


1.        The first question is whether we all truly believe that a full PDP is 
necessary on the IOC/Red Cross marks.  Most of the group, save Greg S on behalf 
of the IPC, did believe that a full pdp on this was necessary.   In a full pdp, 
the legal ramifications of protecting these marks at the second level can be 
more flushed out and exception processes can be developed (if it is determined 
that these marks should indeed be protected).  In addition, many in the group 
discussed wanting more research done on whether the marks of these 
organizations merited differential treatment from other international 
organizations (which is the subject of a soon-to-be released final Issue Report.


2.       The Second consensus call item is a proposal put forth by J. Scott and 
endorsed by the RySG which recommends the following (with some wording tweaks 
discussed during the last call):



a.       Recommend a moratorium be placed on the registration of exact matches 
of the IOC/Red Cross names contained in the GAC recommendation of September __, 
2011 (need to put in exact date) at the second level in the first round of new 
gTLDs pending results of the PDP covering IGO names, IOC/RC names and other 
international organizations.  This would provide a back stop if the PDP does 
not finish in time and would also eliminate the argument that the GNSO is just 
choosing this approach as a way of avoiding the issue. [Note from the Chair:  
This also would be in line with conservative approach contained in the ICANN 
Board resolution dated September 14, 2012.]

b.      Communicate to the GAC:

                                             i.            That the GNSO 
recommends a PDP be initiated as soon as possible to cover IGO names, IOC/RC 
names any other international organizations.

                                           ii.             A rationale for that 
position with a particular emphasis on pointing out the things that could be 
accomplished via a PDP and that would be difficult to adequately do so 
otherwise.

                                          iii.            That the GNSO 
welcomes feedback from the GAC as soon as possible on this position.

                                         iv.            That sincere efforts 
will be made to expedite the PDP; note that the work that has already been done 
on this issue should facilitate the process.

Please make sure that you are able to solicit the feedback necessary to respond 
to the Consensus Call by September 26th.  On the GNSO Council call last week we 
confirmed that we do have the ability to put this proposal out for public 
comment.  In the meantime, I would also like to collect some more of the 
rationale for recommendation 1 (recommending the PDP) and also for the 
moratorium in recommendation 2. Any help in this regard would be greatly 
appreciated.

Thanks!



Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs
46000 Center Oak Plaza, Sterling, VA 20166
Office: +1.571.434.5772  Mobile: +1.202.549.5079  Fax: +1.703.738.7965 / 
jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx>  / 
www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz/>