When: Wednesday, 21 August 2013. 16:00 UTC / This is a 120 Minute Session.
Adobe Connect Link: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/r1onj8cflqp/
http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-20130821-en.mp3
On page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#aug
The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page:
http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/
Attendees:
Jim Bikoff – IPC/IOC
Avri Doria - NCSG
Elizabeth Finberg - RySG
Chuck Gomes – RySG
Alan Greenberg – ALAC
David Heasley – IPC/IOC
Berly Lelievre-Acosta - WIPO
David Maher – RySG
Judd Lauter – IOC/IOC
Sam Paltridge - OECD
Thomas Rickert – NCA –Working group chair
Megan Rogers - OECD
Greg Shatan – IPC
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit - ISO
Joanne Teng - WIPO
Apologies:
Mason Cole - RrSG
Stephane Hankins – Red Cross Red Crescent
Christopher Rassi - Red Cross Red Crescent
Kiran Malancharuvil – IPC
Guilaine Fournet – IEC
ICANN Staff:
Berry Cobb
Brian Peck
Glen De Saint Gery
Julia Charvolen
Proposed Agenda – IGO-INGO WG Meeting – 21 AUGUST 2013 @ 16:00 UTC (120 Min):
- Review Agenda & Changes to SOI’s
- Review Protection Recommendation Working Proposal
- Preparation for Consensus Call
- Review Work Plan
- Confirm next meeting, 28 August 2013 @ 16:00 UTC
Adobe Chat Transcript 21 August 2013:
Berry Cobb:Welcome to the IGO-INGO Conference call for 21 Aug 2013.
Julia Charvolen:Chuck Gomes joined the meeting
Julia Charvolen:Jo Teng joined the meeting
Julia Charvolen:Berly Lelievre-Acosta joined the meeting
Julia Charvolen:Please state your name before speaking for transcript purposes, thank you
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):So I understand it's not clear what was meant between scope 1 and scope 2 for INGOs, and we will clarify when we get there.
Avri Doria:I think well formed divergence can be a most satisfactory outcome. It just gives someone else the authority to decide.
Avri Doria:There its no support for ioc in NCSG,
Thomas Rickert:Noted, Avri!
WIPO (Jo and Berly):We noticed that re: #5 - thank you for the clarification
WIPO (Jo and Berly):For the record, WIPO and the IGO Coalition do not 'support' recommendation #6 per se and expect to provide the WG with a minority position statement
Thomas Rickert:Thanks Jo and Berly!
WIPO (Jo and Berly):(the same reasoning applies to recommendation #8)
David Maher:Apologies - I have to drop off
Avri Doria:We only oppose for ioc
Avri Doria:I Only support igo protection if there is equivalent ingo protection. I
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):I agree Avri.
Avri Doria: Think NCSG would take a similar view. I
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):For the record, we would support the ISO-IEC criteria.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):And if we do go with the ECOSCO list, Scope 2 needs to include Scope 1.
Berry Cobb:@CMT - Have use cases been run against the EC provided that gives the WG a sense of what that list would like?
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Agree Alan.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):But 1-4 doesnt cover acronyms
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):But that would leave out the other 140+ who do not have acronyms listed as their name on the Gen Con List.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):http://csonet.org/content/documents/E2011INF4.pdf
Berry Cobb:AARP (1995)
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):I certainly agree with you Berry.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):For the record, ISO advocates protection for its short name (ISO) which covers all languages. And we would certainly accept protection for the full name in one language.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):I'm not sure any criteria has been considered neutral. For any IO.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Fully agree Alan.
Berry Cobb:If the WG can support that, then it makes Scope 1 defintion easy.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Agree with Avri, it's a package.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):My recommendation is either go back to ISO-IEC criteria, or at least add Scope 1 under 6 and 7.
Avri Doria:Lists are easier
Avri Doria:and some other official types group makes the determination of eligibility
Alan Greenberg:I will also point out that a PDP to give a UDRP-like process to IGOs was being discussed LONG before we talked about any other protections.
Greg Shatan:I have to drop off; I will try to rejoin the call.
Alan Greenberg:Chuck, when you say "protected" do you mean by some law or statute, or by ICANN for domain names?
Chuck Gomes (Verisign):By ICANN for domain names
Julia Charvolen:Thomas disconnected
Alan Greenberg:But URS/UDRP *IS* a form of protection. That is a circular argument. Recall the a UDRP-like-protection was being discussed for IGOs LONG before any other level of protection was on the table.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Just because we can't decide between using only the General or the General plus Special, I don't think means there is not strong support for INGO protection (or for using this list in some way, for that matter.)
Julia Charvolen:Thomas is back on
Chuck Gomes (Verisign):@ Alan: Why would be consider providing URS or UDRP protection if we don't provide other protections?
Alan Greenberg:Because US/UDRP is the weakest form of protection. If you look at the existing TLDs, there is no blocking or URS for TMs. UDRP is the only game in town. ANd there are many in ICANN who have been claiming it is quirte sufficient. So why would we deny that level to IGOs solely because they do not register TMS?
Alan Greenberg:Going back to the 2007 discussion...
Chuck Gomes (Verisign):So should we allow every organization to use the UDRP & URS?
Alan Greenberg:In my mind, every organization with a legel grounds for using that name. (whether TM or other legal grounds). There are other issues with the UDRP, if I remember correctly, bacause of jurisdiction issues. But that is out of our scope.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):I agree Thomas.
Chuck Gomes (Verisign):But we cannot agree whether there are legal grounds so it becomes subjective.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):We agree with Avri here.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Sorry, that was a mistake. Hand is lowered.
Alan Greenberg:Bottom line in my mind is that if someone is masquerading as the World Health Organization or UNICEF, they should have some recourse.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):I think there's more than that!
Avri Doria:If we remove ingo, I drop from any consensus on IGO.
Avri Doria:That its another way to look at it.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):We agree with you Avri, and would certainly provide a minority report.
Chuck Gomes (Verisign):@ Alan: So ICANN becomes a court?
Thomas Rickert:@Avri - INGOs will be in the document.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Agree with Berry!
Avri Doria:I see BA conclusions as ok.i
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):We support you Thomas.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Thank you Thomas and Berry and all colleagues.
Chuck Gomes (Verisign):Thanks Thomas, Berry & all
Avri Doria:Retroactive applicationI
Julia Charvolen:Thank you everyone
