Re: [registrars] Fw: [council] GAC and country name reservations

["Paul M. Kane" <Paul.Kane@REACTO.com>]

The issue one should highlight is that it is futile to have protection measures
that have not been thought through.  WIPO say it is too complicated to address
at this time, GAC and ICANN  "protect"  ISO-3166-1 "ENGLISH" names, yet each
language has a unique (and different) name for each country in the world....

A silly idea....... ill thought through ..... but they will realise that soon
enough.  Governments are good at international negotiations and if they want to
take action they should ratify an International Treaty (then they would realise
in their own space that itis futile)... and leave ICANN to focus on its narrow
remit of technical co-ordination of names and numbers.

Best

Paul

Ken Stubbs wrote:

> erica echos the concerns i expressed to this list last week.
>
> we need to unite here and make it quite clear to ICANN that many of these
> proposed actions are not appropriate without a concensus process..
>
> a clear opportunity exists for potential  future " actions"
> by both WIPO and ICANN here which could be very troubling.
>
> ken stubbs
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "erica" <erica.roberts@bigpond.com>
> To: "Rick H Wesson" <wessorh@ar.com>
> Cc: "Registrars@Dnso.Org" <registrars@dnso.org>
> Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 9:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [registrars] Fw: [council] GAC and country name reservations
>
> Hi Rick,
> I don't think the GAC has got what they want on this yet.  But they almost
> certainly will -  unless the DNSO objects.
> You may recall that WIPO has had a couple of rounds of consultation on the
> need to extend the UDRP to cover IP rights in place names and personal names
> following requests from governments.
> The NC is increasingly concerned about this issue and is now actively
> seeking   the views of the constituencies so that it can determine whether a
> DNSO consensus view can be put to the Board.
>
> erica
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick H Wesson" <wessorh@ar.com>
> To: "erica" <erica.roberts@bigpond.com>
> Cc: "Registrars@Dnso.Org" <registrars@dnso.org>
> Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 10:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [registrars] Fw: [council] GAC and country name reservations
>
> erica,
>
> why is it the GAC gets what they want without confering with the NC or any
> other entity except the board. This action points to just another reason
> we need to evaluate the structure of ICANN.
>
> -rick
>
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2001, erica wrote:
>
> > I draw the attention of Registrars to the recent GAC Communique which
> recomends that the names of countries and distinct ecnomies should be
> reserved in any new gTLDs and warns that the registration of such names may
> be subject to dispute.  This warning picks up issues being canvassed under
> the WIPO process - partiularly the concern by many governments that they
> should be recognised a having intellectual propery rights in
> political/geographical names.
> > Many governments are signatory to a treaty (or similar agreement) under
> which they recognise appellation rights in relation to other industries.
> While I am not fully across this, I do know that this has significantly
> impacted on the wine industry - so that only wines made from grapes grown in
> the French Champaigne area can be called "champaigne", ditto "burgundy" etc.
> This had a big impact on the wine industry world wide and established a
> prededent which gives governments some form of IP rights in place names.
> > As I see it,  this is primarily an issue for Registries who are being
> asked to reserve the relevant names.  However, in the absence of any defined
> list of relevant names (such as the two letter country codes on the the ISO
> 3166-1 list) there is scope for confusion and dispute - which has the
> potential to impact on Registrar business.
> > The NC is taking this issue under consideration and solicits comment from
> the Registrar constituency.
> >
> > erica
> >
> > From: Philip Sheppard
> > To: NC (list)
> > Sent: 24 September 2001 16:56
> > Subject: [council] GAC and country name reservations
> >
> >
> > In a communiqué made by the Government Advisory Council at its Montevideo
> meeting http://www.icann.org/committees/gac/communique-09sep01.htm "the GAC
> recommends that the names of countries and distinct economies, particularly
> those contained in the ISO 3166-1 standard, as applied by ICANN in
> identifying ccTLDs, should be reserved by the .info Registry, (or if
> registered in the Sunrise Period challenged by the Registry and, if
> successful, then reserved) in Latin characters in their official language(s)
> and in English and assigned to the corresponding governments and public
> authorities, at their request, for use. These names in other IDN character
> sets should be reserved in the same way as soon as they become available"
> >
> >
> > In the same communiqué the GAC further "draws the attention of ICANN and
> the Registries to the fact that a large number of other names, including
> administrative sub-divisions of countries and distinct economies as
> recognised in international fora, may give rise to contested registrations.
> Accordingly the GAC recommends that Registrars and eventual Registrants
> should be made aware of this".
> >
> > ---------------------------------------
> >
> > I believe that the NC should issue a statement about this and ask you to
> consult in your constituencies rapidly. I currently propose that we could
> consider:
> >
> > - urging caution on the GAC in taking this step,
> >
> > - point out that dot info is but the start of a TLD expansion and
> something much more interesting for countries could be possible
> >
> > - propose that WIPO is the best place for discussion on geographical
> names.
> >
> >
> >
> > Comments please.
> >
> > Philip
> >
> > NC Chair
> >
> >
> >
> >