Re: [wg-b] Formal Ballot

[Milton Mueller <mueller@syr.edu>]

Michael:
My responses:

I have trouble with the word "safeguards." It is far too general and a
positively-loaded term. Who is against "safeguards?" It gives no sense that
"safeguards" for one interest (big TM holders) are very dangerous or costly to
other interests. Can we say something more specific like: "exclusions of famous
marks" or "special protections for famous marks?" or "special measures to
protect famous marks"? I feel very strongly that such a word substitution is
necessary.

I have trouble viewing B and C as mutually exclusive. I think they are both true
and would want to vote for both of them.


>       [] Option A - Some type of safeguards, yet to be determined are
> necessary to protect the interests of consumers and trademark owners.
>       [] Option B - No safeguards are necessary because the status quo is
> acceptable
>       [] Option C - Safeguards are not proper because it exceeds the scope
> of ICANN's authority
>       [] Option D - I choose to abstain from the voting process at this time
>