Comment on WIPO 2 recommendations

["Alexander Svensson" <alexander@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

The Interim ALAC draft comments on the WIPO 2 recommendations highlight
precisely two major areas of concern: Parts of the recommendations
themselves, but also the attempt to implement the recommendations
through ICANN. 

As has been pointed out during the WIPO 2 process, the names and
acronyms of international intergovernmental organizations already are
protected: They have an exclusive domain name space with strict criteria
being enforced, and WIPO itself is using it for its World Wide Web
presence.  There may be ample room for improvement with regard to
registration and administration of the .INT top level domain, but as
long as it is scarcely used by IGOs, good faith domain name
registrations in other gTLDs by other entities should not be put at risk
and should not be prohibited for the future. 

A complaint system based on the use of domain names is a step on a
slippery slope towards Internet content regulation outside the regular
court system, as the Interim ALAC draft correctly points out.  The
national legal and political systems are still trying to find the best
approach towards Internet content deemed offensive in some way, and this
debate is far from over.  Any domain name regulation which does not
clearly exclude such content aspects is premature and clearly outside
ICANN's mission. 

ICANN already had to deal with the request by its Governmental Advisory
Committee (GAC) to reserve country names under the .INFO top level
domain.  Interestingly, it seems that only a small group of governments
has put the reserved domain names to use.  They were obviously not
obliged or required to do so and the governments are free to just keep
the domain names.  However, this very broad approach would be
detrimental if it were applied to more top level domains and more
subject areas (such as IGOs). 

ICANN can and should take the WIPO 2 recommendation for what it is
labelled: It is a recommendation which highlights areas of concern for
governments and intergovernmental organizations which should be taken
very seriously.  The most helpful approach for existing and future
domain name registrants, for Internet users and for the governments and
IGOs themselves would be to consider a relaunch of the .INT top level
domain.  Governments and intergovernmental organizations should help to
develop the rules for their exclusive domain name space and an effort
should be made to make the meaning of .INT much more known to the broad
public: .INT stands for official Internet services by governments and
IGOs; no other groups or persons are allowed to register or reserve .INT
domain names. 

Best regards,
/// Alexander Svensson