Greetings I am the Administraive contact for .nz and I have received advice that I should send you a copy of the .nz response to the WG-A report which was sent to Fay Howard on July 30. .nz trusts that you will give full weight to our position. I attach the document in rich text format, plus the relevant html files. Cordially Sue Leader - Executive Director ISOCNZ (Internet Society of New Zealand Inc) Exe.Dir@isocnz.org.nz Voice: +64-4-801-6256 http://www.isocnz.org.nz Postal: Level 1, (e)-Vision Centre, 282 Wakefield St, Wellington "ERROR 406: file corrupt: earth.config -- reboot universe? (Y/N)"
The following section of this message contains a file attachment prepared for transmission using the Internet MIME message format. If you are using Pegasus Mail, or any another MIME-compliant system, you should be able to save it or view it from within your mailer. If you cannot, please ask your system administrator for assistance. ---- File information ----------- File: .nz response to WGA report 0800999.rtf Date: 3 Aug 1999, 14:57 Size: 29528 bytes. Type: MS-Richtext
.nz response to WGA report 0800999.rtf
The following section of this message contains a file attachment prepared for transmission using the Internet MIME message format. If you are using Pegasus Mail, or any another MIME-compliant system, you should be able to save it or view it from within your mailer. If you cannot, please ask your system administrator for assistance. ---- File information ----------- File: nzoralicann599.html Date: 2 Aug 1999, 23:27 Size: 9810 bytes. Type: Unknown
The following section of this message contains a file attachment prepared for transmission using the Internet MIME message format. If you are using Pegasus Mail, or any another MIME-compliant system, you should be able to save it or view it from within your mailer. If you cannot, please ask your system administrator for assistance. ---- File information ----------- File: nzposition.html Date: 19 May 1999, 17:36 Size: 33272 bytes. Type: HTML-textTitle: NEW ZEALAND POSITION ON
NEW ZEALAND POSITION ON
THE WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANISATION
(WIPO) REPORT TO
THE INTERNET CORPORATION FOR
ASSIGNED NAMES AND NUMBERS (ICANN)
MAY 25 1999 BOARD MEETING
The Internet Society of New Zealand Inc held a "National Summit on Internet Governance Changes" on April 30 1999. The Summit was attended by a broad representation of the stakeholders in the development of the Internet in New Zealand, including business, academia, government, individuals and professional bodies. The Summit, representing the New Zealand Internet community, achieved a near unanimous consensus on the issues raised by the March Singapore meeting and subsequent events. The Summit stated:
"The New Zealand Internet community views with concern ICANN's move into policy creation before the establishment of membership structures and the ensuing democratic election of an internationally representative Board has taken place. We respectfully request that the Interim ICANN Board undertake no policy decisions, and rather finish the process for which they were appointed, namely the establishment of the requisite membership structures which can then elect the new Board. It is appropriate for that elected representative Board to move into policy approval based upon recommendations from the Constituency Organisations required by the Articles of Association.
"We oppose many of the WIPO recommendations, as outlined below, and oppose any of them being imposed upon ccTLD's. While there may be a need for a global disputes resolution process in some areas of the gTLD's, that is not the case for New Zealand, and it is the right of other ccTLD's to choose whether they utilise such a process. We believe that the need for such a process has been based on a US-centric model which does not necessarily reflect the situation in other countries.
"In particular we oppose any compulsory disputes arbitration process and the compulsory take-down of disputed domain names. Both proposals add costs to doing business on the Internet and increase market uncertainty. In a worst-case scenario smaller businesses or businesses in smaller ccTLD's would be at risk of bankruptcy caused by the process if challenged by larger businesses or businesses in larger countries or the multi-national arena.
"We also oppose the Registrar Accreditation Guidelines and accompanying contractual provisions being imposed on ccTLD's. We believe that these provisions will lessen competition, rather than enhance it, by making the stakes too high for smaller businesses and smaller countries.
"We call for ICANN to instead hold to the By-Laws under which it is legally incorporated, in particular Article VI, Section 2 (b) and Article VI-B, Section 1(a)(*1). Under these articles, the WIPO proposals and any recommendations from the GAC must be sent first to the DNSO for their advice. It is then up to the ICANN Board to follow that advice.
"New Zealand has a successful model which operates in a lightly-regulated environment. Our experience is that the low entry-barrier model with a "first come first serve" basis has demonstrated its worth. The New Zealand Courts have endorsed the approach (see http://www.domainz.net.nz/newsstand/) and find no jurisdictional problems with the very few cases which have come before them. In a judgement of the High Court of New Zealand dated 11 November 1998 the High Court said of Domainz' policy and conduct:
"I agree that there is no basis for pleading that Domainz committed some breach of a legal duty. It was not in any way party to conduct of a third defendant; on the contrary it has acted, as one would expect, honestly, efficiently, moderately and in conformity with its role as disinterested gatekeeper to the domain names system."
"The New Zealand Government will send representation to the ICANN Government Advisory Committee Meeting in Berlin.
"ISOCNZ has the confidence of the Internet community as represented at the Summit and the government of New Zealand (see http://www.moc.govt.nz/ran/itpg/internet/index.html) for the policy environment under which ".nz" is run. New Zealand has the sovereign right to determine how ".nz" is run and opposes any attempt by ICANN or it's advisors to intervene in our internal affairs."
*1 "ARTICLE VI: SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
Section 2: RESPONSIBILITIES AND POWERS
(b) The Supporting Organizations shall serve as advisory bodies to the Board, with the primary responsibility for developing and recommending substantive policies regarding those matters falling within their specific responsibilities..."
"ARTICLE VI-B: THE DOMAIN NAME SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION
Section 1: DESCRIPTION
(a) The DNSO shall advise the Board with respect to policy issues relating to the Domain Name System..."
The Internet Society of New Zealand is a not for profit, incorporated society. Its membership is open. Membership subscription costs NZ$50 per year. A full description of the principles of ISOCNZ may be obtained at its website at http://www.isocnz.org.nz.
ISOCNZ has no affiliation or formal relationship with ISOC.
ISOCNZ is responsible for management of the ".nz" ccTLD. It has contracted the management of this to its wholly owned for-profit company, the New Zealand Internet Registry Limited, which trades as Domainz.
In line with that responsibility, ISOCNZ maintains a watching brief on all activities which may affect the fabric of the Internet. Where appropriate ISOCNZ makes extensive effort to take part in the international consultation processes whether by email, in person, or by written submission. Internal consultation is normally held with our own membership, but when the issues are of a broader and more profound impact, ISOCNZ consults with the New Zealand community as a whole. ISOCNZ regularly liaises with the New Zealand government on issues of import to the greater New Zealand community.
(see - http://www.isocnz.org.nz/magaziner.htm)
(see http://www.domainz.net.nz/newsstand/usgovt.html)
(see:http://www.domainz.net.nz/newsstand/wipo2.html.).
(see http://www.isocnz.org.nz/WIPOresponse2.html)
[The New Zealand Ministry of Commerce made comment to WIPO endorsing ISOCNZ’s submission.]
New Zealand has been monitoring the significant changes to the governance of the global Internet which have been underway since the publication of the American Government's Green and White Papers. ISOCNZ and The New Zealand Internet Registry Ltd (Domainz) were involved in the consultations processes which led to the formation of The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) outlined above This process has been ongoing since late 1998 and we shared world expectations that once the membership structures had been created and the representative boards, such as the Domain Name Supporting Organisation (DNSO), had been elected, the current small group of appointed Interim Directors would be replaced by freely elected representatives of the Internet Community. At that stage the future policy for the governance of the global Internet would be developed.
The March 4 meeting of ICANN in Singapore saw the ICANN Board start to move into policy-implementation mode. This, coupled with the results of the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) "Requests for Comments" (RFC3) process, due to be presented at the ICANN meeting in Berlin in May, raised significant concerns within the New Zealand Internet community that New Zealand's right to determine how its own Domain Name System is administered may be removed or significantly altered. New Zealand was particularly concerned that ICANN appeared to be moving towards an uncritical adoption of the WIPO proposals which have significant implications for New Zealand in the realms of National Sovereignty, Ecommerce, and the Knowledge Economy.
ISOCNZ called an urgent National Summit when concerns about the ICANN process became apparent. The Summit was run in partnership with Ihug (The Internet Group) and Ernst & Young, the latter providing a Senior Manager as the Independent Chair for the Summit.
The desired broad cross-sectorial representation at the Summit was achieved (see Appendix One). Fifty-five representatives from a number of government departments, top Internet Service providers, Web Design companies, educational institutions, law firms, and professional associations attended. In addition the Summit was audio-cast across the Internet with at least twenty-six streams in use at one time (total listeners unknown) and direct participation for listeners was enabled using email to the Summit.
The National Summit achieved consensus on the key issues of concern to the New Zealand community. Participants in the break-out groups on Intellectual Property & the DNS, Policy & the DNS, and NZ Representation at ICANN brought back specific recommendations which are outlined below. The few dissenting points of view accepted the consensus when their issues were fully debated (also below).
(see http://www.domainz.net.nz/reference/report.html)
The Internet Society of New Zealand Inc held a "National Summit on Internet Governance Changes" on April 30 1999. The Summit was attended by a broad representation of the stakeholders in New Zealand Internet and achieved a near unanimous consensus on the issues raised by the March ICANN Singapore meeting and subsequent events.
The New Zealand Internet community:
and calls for ICANN to hold to By-Laws as stated in Article VI, Section 2 (b) and Article VI-B, Section 1(a) which require that the Supporting Organisations (in this case the DNSO) be the ones to review such proposals and then make recommendations for the ICANN Board to carry out.
Signed
The Internet Society of New Zealand Inc
APPENDIX ONE
NEW ZEALAND NATIONAL SUMMIT ON CHANGES TO THE GOVERNANCE OF THE INTERNET:
ATTENDEES BY ORGANISATION/COMPANY
Barrister |
Black Albatross |
CLEAR Communications Ltd |
Consultant |
Ernst & Young |
Lawyer |
Innovus Limited |
Internet ProLink NZ Ltd |
JADE Group |
KuniSurf |
Labour Party Spokesperson On Communications & Information Technology |
Longworth Associates |
Ministry of Commerce |
Ministry of Research, Science & Technology |
Netlink Corporate Internet Specialists |
New Zealand Army |
New Zealand Computer Society |
New Zealand Police |
New Zealand Post |
North Shore City Council |
NZ Internet Registry Ltd (Domainz) |
Optimation Ltd |
Shift Ltd |
Tasman Solutions |
Telecom Internet Services |
Terabyte Interactive Ltd |
The Internet Company of New Zealand Ltd (ICONZ) |
The Internet Group Ltd (Ihug) |
The Internet Society Of New Zealand Inc (ISOCNZ) |
The University of Auckland |
TUANZ (Telecommunication Users Association) |
UNITEC Institute of Technology |
University of Waikato |
Wang NZ Ltd |
Web Innovations Ltd |
APPENDIX TWO
ISOCNZ Summit
April 30th 1999
Notes from the Breakout session of the
Intellectual Property group
The group reviewed the paper prepared by Peter Dengate-Thrush that is to be sent to WIPO as the response from ISOCNZ. Peter had already presented his paper to the summit meeting, and participated in the group discussion.
Points raised were –
Names known in NZ will not be known in other parts of the world. To be consistent in its application, would need to determine where the cross-over points occur. Existing practices should be adequate to deal with name piracy.
Do not support this initiative – it is too difficult to describe; difficult to ‘get in’ – ie to become recognised as a famous name at the higher level, also difficult to determine the process by which a name is dropped from the list. The WIPO report is silent on how the status of a famous name is lost.
Don Rae - NZ is party to a treaty but the clauses have never been used.
Sanyo were able to claim their domain name back from the pirate but through normal means.
The ICANN document suggests there will be a choice of four locations for dealing with issues.
This group disagrees with the location of the root server being one of those locations. This option would lead to going to the country where the root server resides – which may be fundamentally different from the citizenship or residence of the parties. This would make legislation difficult and impractical..
More on piracy -
There have been only very few cases in NZ so it’s a bit difficult to make comment, eg only 50 cases in the US.
It is observed that rules and regulations that work are those that the community accept as being fair and reasonable. Some trademark lawyers - in the first few years kiwis register famous names, the courts recognise this and refused to accept. This is now maturing - all the pirates are now pulling out.
Have to have rules accepted by international community.
RMMB - Have dealt with domain name trademark disputes, none has ever gone to court. Existing law is adequate.
The issue is probably overstated.
WIPO brief -
Should have a uniform approach for ccTLD’s -
Do not want a global mandated solution - the processes should be developed along the lines of country of residence and suited to individual countries or other appropriate lower level jurisdiction.
Don’t want a online process interfering with existing procedures - mediation should be an option, with the parties agreeing the outcome will be binding.
Other comments on Peter’s paper -
20-21 - the scale of the problem may be large in other locations, we don’t have a problem with this in NZ.
There is considerable tension with domain names, but feel that the tension is being adequately resolved with existing procedures. While we are promoting hands-off can’t say that there is no tension. But the tension is difficult to define and has not caused material substantial problems, or insurmountable problems, (this is purely commenting in the disputes within .nz)
.com names - too much time to deal with US lawyers etc, so support a type of regime to be operated globally - eg by ICANN.
The disputes resolutions may not be appropriate for ccTLDs because the two different groups face considerably different disputes.
Would be happy to see the proposed (global) approach to disputes resolution less the automatic takedown less the mandatory nature – should be optional only. Should only apply to GTLDs or cross ccTLD
Optional jurisdiction available - a global external and neutral organisation to mandate the process.
Support 39
Agree with 40
Agree with 41
Agree that there should be a contractual arrangement. But NZ has its own contracting arrangements.
48 - the need to provide contact details should be just as critical for non-commercial as for commercial domain name holders. Less evident - provides accurate contact information. The details should be provided, and accurate in case of remedy. Then can aim the suit at the registrant.
49 - support
56 - and add willful or negligently fail to provide accurate information.
65-70 support
J Northover
Recorder
APPENDIX THREE
Policy and the DNS
Andrew Mason Facilitator
Summary
Cc’s should be in the hands of relevant government to manage
Show of hands 20 up 1 down - agree with the proposition (1 recorded abstention)
.nz remains under control of NZ and we’re happy with it
want to seem more of what is planned by ICANN
We should go back to ICANN and say that the Govt and the Community are happy with what we have and we have reservations over the processes that are proposed. Our comments are embodied in what ISOCNZ has responded on the WIPO paper.
M Harris
Recorder
APPENDIX FOUR
ISOCNZ Summit
30 April 1999
New Zealand Representation at ICANNDirection of representation?
Representatives:Jim Higgins, Chair, ISOCNZ
Peter Dengate Thrush, Barrister
wwwTLD group will probably have a strong influence on ICANN
Internet is key to NZ economy
What is the cost to the end user?
ISOCNZ is working through the best ways to support access etc to all of NZ
Government is likely to develop a paper in advance, detailing current what NZ policy and it’s reluctance to move away from it.
What do we need to do?
R Bourne
Recorder
| Purpose
| Issues | Membership
|
Council | Communications
| Internet Info | Links
| Index | Contact
|
© 1999 ISOCNZ, last reviewed 19/05/1999
The following section of this message contains a file attachment
prepared for transmission using the Internet MIME message format.
If you are using Pegasus Mail, or any another MIME-compliant system,
you should be able to save it or view it from within your mailer.
If you cannot, please ask your system administrator for assistance.
---- File information -----------
File: WIPOresponse2.html
Date: 2 Apr 1999, 17:13
Size: 19247 bytes.
Type: Unknown