RE: [gtld-council] modifications to new gTLD recommendations #3 and 6
- To: "Liz Williams" <liz.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gtld-council] modifications to new gTLD recommendations #3 and 6
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 10:26:35 -0400
Good point Liz. We certainly have tried throughout to avoid exposing
ICANN to unneccessary risk. That was not my intent but it does seem to
me if I am understanding the concerns of the NCUC and IP interests
correctly that we need to try to find some way to make sure that the
recommendation adequately accommodates both areas of concern, which I
think are somewhat different. I think 'strings' works for trademarks
but I am not sure it works for 'freedom of expression'. Let's keep
working together on this without unneccesarily exposing ICANN.
"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any
unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this message in error, please notify sender
immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Liz Williams [mailto:liz.williams@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 10:20 AM
> To: Gomes, Chuck
> Cc: gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gtld-council] modifications to new gTLD
> recommendations #3 and 6
> I would urge you to reconsider carefully the second part of
> this recommendation. Including the second part means that
> ICANN itself would become part of the objection process. I
> am not sure that this is what you intend or how that would be
> measured. Revising the recommendation on the basis of the
> recommendation below would cause some significant
> subjectivity being introduced into the process about
> "infringement and unfairness". Of course ICANN must, in the
> selection process, operate in accordance with its bylaws and
> mission and core values.
> We have spent a great deal of time on ensuring that we have a
> pre- published, objective process that is about the applicant
> and the string.
> Kind regards.
> Liz Williams
> Senior Policy Counselor
> ICANN - Brussels
> +32 2 234 7874 tel
> +32 2 234 7848 fax
> +32 497 07 4243 mob
> On 29 Jun 2007, at 15:59, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> > Regarding Recommendation 3, it seems to me that there are two key
> > elements: 1) strings that may infringe existing legal rights and 2)
> > the selection process that may infringe existing legal
> rights. If I
> > am correct, then we need to include both in this
> recommendation and I
> > think we started working in that direction yesterday.
> > Chuck Gomes
> > "This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> entity to
> > which it is addressed, and may contain information that is
> > confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any
> > unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly
> > If you have received this message in error, please notify sender
> > immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Robin Gross
> >> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 2:14 PM
> >> To: gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Subject: [gtld-council] modifications to new gTLD
> recommendations #3
> >> and 6
> >> NCUC proposes the following modifications to new gTLD
> >> #3 and 6:
> >> Rec. 3:
> >> The process for selecting strings must not infringe existing legal
> >> rights that are enforceable under internationally recognized
> >> principles of law or the applicant's national law.
> >> Examples of these legal rights that are internationally recognized
> >> include, but are not limited to, rights defined in the Paris
> >> Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (in
> >> trademark rights), the Universal Declaration of Human
> Rights and the
> >> International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (in
> >> freedom of expression rights).
> >> Rec 6:
> >> Strings must not be contrary to legal norms that are enforceable
> >> under generally accepted and internationally recognized
> principles of
> >> law.
> >> Taking into account the aforementioned limitations, no application
> >> shall be rejected solely because the applicant or string is
> >> associated with an unpopular or controversial point of view.