[npoc-voice] Consultation to all NPOC members regarding IFRC´s request on "¨Protection of Red Cross/Red Crescent Designations in the Domain Name System"
Dear NPOC Colleagues, The International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), a NPOC member, has requested NPOC´s Executive Committee (NPOC-EC) to submit the following constituency-wide consultation to all NPOC members regarding IFRC´s request on "¨Protection of Red Cross/Red Crescent Designations in the Domain Name System." IFRC is requesting approval of such consultation in order to allow NPOC´s EC to submit a note to ICANN´s board. Find below a short version of the request prepared by IFRC to provide further insight to NPOC members as to why the protection of the red cross, red crescent and red crystal designations and related names (designations) in the new gTLD program is important. This information is complemented with the two documents attached: 1) letter to ICANN´s Board submitted 15 June, and 2) statement submitted to the GNSO Council on 23 June. Please send in your comments on this request and statement within the next 20 calendar days (by July 22nd, 2012) via npoc.voice. Thanks. As prepared by IFRC: "We would like to attach Red Cross documents (letter to the Board submitted 15 June and the statement submitted to the GNSO Council on 23 June) to provide further insight to NPOC as to why the protection for the Movement's designations from unauthorized domain name registration is important. Below is the short version from the Red Cross. In short, the registration of domain names containing the designations by those not duly authorised to do so is a violation of international law, which is sanctioned under the domestic criminal laws of numerous jurisdictions. Thus, a program that allows the registration in the first instance is very problematic. Therefore, IFRC has requested that ICANN implement measures to prohibit the ability of unauthorized persons to register domain names that contains the designations to confirm with international law. Regarding the program's proposed rights protection mechanisms, several of the operational details for these have not been finalized, thus their utility and impact on the Movement is difficult to fully assess. The IFRC is also awaiting clarity regarding the submission of materials related to treaty protection that would allow the Movement to fully utilize several of the rights protection mechanisms." If these constituency's consultations permit, NPOC-EC could submit a note to the Board indicating support for protection for the designations in the following terms: ---------------------------------- To the Board of Directors * We believe the red cross, red crescent and red crystal emblems and their designations and related names (hereafter designations) should be protected at the top and second levels. * We acknowledge that the unique status of the designations is based on universally agreed norms of international law, which are binding upon all States within the International Community. * The Geneva Conventions of 1949, ratified today by 194 States and their Additional Protocols of 1977 and 2005 specifically reserve the use of the designations to armed forces medical services and to those assisting affected persons and communities in times of war and armed conflict. The global public interest at stake stems from the concern that any use of the designations by those not duly authorised to do so is liable to undermine the perception of the designations, as well as the protection that they represent and symbolize. * The registration of domain names containing the designations by those not duly authorised to do so is a violation of international law, which is sanctioned under the domestic criminal laws of numerous jurisdictions. * The protection of these designations does not primarily stem from their affiliation or association to any particular organisation within the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. Also, the protection of the designations does not stem either from trademark laws. Thus, protection of the designations should be distinguished from claims made in regard to names of international or intergovernmental organizations, not-for-profit or non-governmental organizations. * We also believe that the GNSO Council's recommendations for top level protection of the designations should be reconsidered positively by the Board and that appropriate measures be immediately undertaken to protect the designations at the second level." ---------------------------------- Regards, Eduardo Monge NPOC Communications Committee Chair Project Development and International Relations Officer Omar Dengo Foundation San Jose, Costa Rica
RCRC Statement 6-23-2012.pdf
Position paper & Annexes.pdf