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

[Caroline Figuères <cfigueres@xxxxxxxx>]

Dear all
Fully agree that we should seek protection for all non profits. I am
still not in favor of exceptions. Best Caroline

Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone

Op 4 okt. 2012 om 17:29 heeft Jan Morton <JMorton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
het volgende geschreven:

>
> I also agree that it is important to seek protection for all nonprofits.
> Thanks for all you are doing in this arena.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Jan Morton
> Young Life
> (719) 381-1769
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-npoc-voice@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-npoc-voice@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Carson, Michael
> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 6:36 AM
> To: klaus.stoll@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; jecochard@xxxxxxx; alain.berranger@xxxxxxxxx
> 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
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>