Re: [npoc-voice] Fwd: [liaison6c] Protection of International Olympic Committee (IOC) / Red Cross Names (RCRC) Drafting Team - Recommendations

["Carson, Michael" <Michael.Carson@xxxxxxxx>]

Klaus and Jean-Louis,

Thank you both for your comments.  I wholeheartedly concur with what has been 
said.

Best regards,

Michael
YMCA of the USA


Sent from my Samsung smartphone on AT&T



-------- Original message --------
Subject: Re: [npoc-voice] Fwd: [liaison6c] Protection of International Olympic 
Committee (IOC) / Red Cross Names (RCRC) Drafting Team - Recommendations
From: "klaus.stoll" <klaus.stoll@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Jean-Louis Ecochard <jecochard@xxxxxxx>,Alain Berranger 
<alain.berranger@xxxxxxxxx>
CC: "npoc-voice@xxxxxxxxx" 
<npoc-voice@xxxxxxxxx>,"ioc-rcrc-recommendations@xxxxxxxxx" 
<ioc-rcrc-recommendations@xxxxxxxxx>



Dear Jean-Louis

I want to Thank You for raising what might be the most important aspect in
this debate: protection and a plain playing field for all non-profits. I
confess, I think we, including me,  got side tracked in the debate by
concentrating on the individual and not on the collective. I think it would
be great if we could now all, and I include here the IOC and the IRC, move
away from seeking protection for individual organizations or not, but close
ranks and seek protection and justice for all!

Thanks again for your extremely valuable contribution

Yours

Klaus

-----Original Message-----
From: Jean-Louis Ecochard
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 12:32 AM
To: Alain Berranger
Cc: npoc-voice@xxxxxxxxx ; ioc-rcrc-recommendations@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [npoc-voice] Fwd: [liaison6c] Protection of International
Olympic Committee (IOC) / Red Cross Names (RCRC) Drafting Team -
Recommendations


Cher Alain,

I agree and I am in favor of the proposed PDP route.

But also want to make it clear that we have to represent the needs of all
non-profits, big and small, members and non-members and that while IRC and
IOC had the resources to pay attention to the early ICANN texts and hence
insert their requests for protection by the deadlines, it was not the case
of other non-profits who either did not know what was happening (and most
still don't ) or did not have the resources to request protection.

With understanding that the exception process is closed and respecting
opinions asking no more exception be made, it is nonetheless unfair and
unjust that so many non-profits brands will risk being co-opted at the gTLD
level and thus have to potentially spend donor money to making the gTLD
right instead of doing good. As NGOs are a substantial part of the public
good,  it is in the utmost interest of the public good to open this
exception process broader than IRC and IOC's brands to the interest of all
NGOs and make it a standard for the protection of non-profit brands instead
of an exception limited to IRC and IOC.

Merci,
Jean-Louis Ecochard



From: Alain Berranger
<alain.berranger@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:alain.berranger@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Tuesday, October 2, 2012 3:07 PM
To: "npoc-voice@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:npoc-voice@xxxxxxxxx>"
<npoc-voice@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:npoc-voice@xxxxxxxxx>>,
"ioc-rcrc-recommendations@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:ioc-rcrc-recommendations@xxxxxxxxx>"
<ioc-rcrc-recommendations@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:ioc-rcrc-recommendations@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [npoc-voice] Fwd: [liaison6c] Protection of International Olympic
Committee (IOC) / Red Cross Names (RCRC) Drafting Team - Recommendations

Dear NPOC Colleagues,

I do not recall an NPOC consultation on this. Hence, it is not possible to
refer to an NCSG opposition, but I presume only to an NCUC opposition
(although I have not followed NCUC on this issue). That said, we at NPOC
need to express ourselves on this issue. I for one favor the PDP route as an
appropriate compromise. What say you?

Alain

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:Glen@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 6:17 PM
Subject: [liaison6c] Protection of International Olympic Committee (IOC) /
Red Cross Names (RCRC) Drafting Team - Recommendations
To: liaison6c <liaison6c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:liaison6c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>


https://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/ioc-rcrc-recommendations-28sep12-en.htm
Protection of International Olympic Committee (IOC) / Red Cross Names (RCRC)
Drafting Team – Recommendations
Comment/Reply Periods (*)

Important Information Links

Comment Open:

28 September 2012

Comment Close:

19 October 2012

Close Time (UTC):

23:59 UTC

Public Comment
Announcement<https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-28sep12-en.htm>

Reply Open:

20 October 2012

To Submit Your Comments (Forum)<mailto:ioc-rcrc-recommendations@xxxxxxxxx>

Reply Close:

9 November 2012

View Comments
Submitted<http://forum.icann.org/lists/ioc-rcrc-recommendations/>

Close Time (UTC):

23:59 UTC

Report of Public Comments

Brief Overview

Originating Organization:

GNSO

Categories/Tags:


  *   Top-Level Domains
  *   Second-Level Domains
  *   Policy Process
  *   Intellectual Property

Purpose (Brief):

The IOC/RCRC Drafting Team (DT) requests community comment on the latest
recommendations created for second level protections of names relating to
the International Olympic Committee and the Red Cross/Red Crescent.

Current Status:

Open for Public Comment

Next Steps:

The Drafting Team's recommendations will be updated to reflect community
feedback submitted through this forum and via final agreement of the
Drafting Team members. Final recommendations will then be presented to the
GNSO Council for its consideration.

Staff Contact:

Brian Peck, Margie Milam

Email:

Policy-staff@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:Policy-staff@xxxxxxxxx?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20Protection%20of%20International%20Olympic%20Committee%20%28IOC%29%20/%20Red%20Cross%20Names%20%28RCRC%29%20Drafting%20Team%20%E2%80%93%20Recommendations%20public%20comment%20period>

Detailed Information

Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose


As a result of IOC/RCRC being granted top level protections for the first
round of the new gTLD program, the IOC/RCRC Drafting Team was further tasked
to consider whether the same protections should be afforded at the second
level prior to the first delegation of a new gTLD. Since the beginning of
2012, the IOC/RCRC Drafting Team (DT) has deliberated about possible second
level protections and how to respond to the GAC's request for protections.
The DT now submits the recommendations formulated by the DT and makes them
available for public comment before final submission to the GNSO Council.

Note from the IOC/RCRC Drafting Team Chair:
These recommendations are being posted at the request of the Drafting Team.
Although some members of the Drafting Team believe that a PDP is not
necessary at this time to grant second level protections for the IOC/RCRC, a
consensus of the DT does in fact agree that a PDP represents an appropriate
compromise on this issue. With respect to the Recommendations #2 and #3
(temporary protection at second level), there is strong support amongst the
Drafting Team for those recommendations with opposition from the
Non-commercial Stakeholder Group and Thomas Rickert. A copy of statements
from certain constituencies, stakeholder groups, and/or individuals is
attached as appendices to the recommendations.

Section II: Background


The ICANN Board had requested policy advice from the GNSO Council and the
GAC on whether special protections should be afforded to the RCRC, IOC
and/or IGOs. Specifically, in its Singapore resolution, the Board authorized
the President and CEO to implement the New gTLD Program "which includes the
following elements: "the 30 May 2011 version of the Applicant Guidebook,
subject to the revisions agreed to with the GAC on 19 June 2011, including:
...(b) incorporation of text concerning protection for specific requested
Red Cross and IOC names for the top level only during the initial
application round, until the GNSO and GAC develop policy advice based on the
global public interest....."

During September 2011, the GAC also sent advice to the GNSO with a proposal
for granting second level protections based upon the protections afforded to
IOC/RCRC at the first level. In the same month, section 2.2.1.2.3 was added
to the latest version of the new gTLD Applicant Guidebook dated 19 September
2011.

As a result of the GAC proposal submitted to the GNSO, the GNSO Council
created a call for volunteers to form a drafting team about creating a
response to the GAC. The IOC/RCRC Drafting Team was formed has since created
a set of recommendations for protecting the IOC/RCRC names at the second
level and includes an outline for a response to the GAC from the GNSO. The
Drafting Team now wishes to solicit feedback from the community prior to
submission of the recommendations to the GNSO Council.

See the IOC/RCRC Drafting Team page for more detail at:
http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/red-cross-ioc.htm

Section III: Document and Resource Links

IOC/RCRC Drafting Team Recommendations
Report<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/ioc-rcrc-recommendations-28sep12-en.pdf>
[PDF, 152 KB]

Section IV: Additional Information

None




(*) Comments submitted after the posted Close Date/Time are not guaranteed
to be considered in any final summary, analysis, reporting, or
decision-making that takes place once this period lapses.


Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat
gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
http://gnso.icann.org




--
Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
Member, Board of Directors, CECI,
http://www.ceci.ca<http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>
Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business,
www.schulich.yorku.ca<http://www.schulich.yorku.ca<http://www.schulich.yorku.ca<http://www.schulich.yorku.ca>>
Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation,
www.gkpfoundation.org<http://www.gkpfoundation.org<http://www.gkpfoundation.org<http://www.gkpfoundation.org>>
NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation,
www.chasquinet.org<http://www.chasquinet.org>
Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
Skype: alain.berranger


AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALITÉ
Ce courriel est confidentiel et est à l’usage exclusif du destinataire
ci-dessus. Toute personne qui lit le présent message sans en être le
destinataire, ou l’employé(e) ou la personne responsable de le remettre au
destinataire, est par les présentes avisée qu’il lui est strictement
interdit de le diffuser, de le distribuer, de le modifier ou de le
reproduire, en tout ou en partie . Si le destinataire ne peut être joint ou
si ce document vous a été communiqué par erreur, veuillez nous en informer
sur le champ  et détruire ce courriel et toute copie de celui-ci. Merci de
votre coopération.

CONFIDENTIALITY MESSAGE
This e-mail message is confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of
the addressee. Please note that, should this message be read by anyone other
than the addressee, his or her employee or the person responsible for
forwarding it to the addressee, it is strictly prohibited to disclose,
distribute, modify or reproduce the contents of this message, in whole or in
part. If the addressee cannot be reached or if you have received this e-mail
in error, please notify us immediately and delete this e-mail and destroy
all copies. Thank you for your cooperation.