When: Wednesday, 8 May 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-20130508-en.mp3
On page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#may
The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page:
http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/
Attendees:
Lanre Ajayi – NCA
Jim Bikoff – IPC/IOC
David Heasley - IOC
Avri Doria – NCSG
Elizabeth Finberg - RySG
Chuck Gomes – RySG
Alan Greenberg – ALAC
Stephane Hankins - NCSG
David Maher - RySG
Kiran Malancharuvil - IPC/IOC
Christopher Rassi - Red Cross
Thomas Rickert – NCA –Working group chair
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit – ISO
David Roache-Turner - WIPO
Mason Cole - GNSO Council vice chair – RrSG
Evan Leibovitch – ALAC
Judd Laufer – IOC replacing Kiran Malancharuvil
Wolfgang Kleinwächter – NCSG
Wilson Abigaba – NCSG
Greg Shatan – NCA
Debra Hughes - NCSG
Apologies:
Mary Wong - NCUC
Osvaldo Novoa – ISPCP
Guilaine Fournet – (IEC)
ICANN Staff:
Berry Cobb
Brian Peck
Marika Konings
Glen de saint Géry
Proposed Agenda – IGO-INGO WG Meeting – 8 MAY 2013 @ 16:00 UTC (120 Min):
1. Roll Call / SOI Update
2. Exact Match Full Names Protection (Spec. 5 in RA, RSEP, Ineligible for Delegation 2.2.1.2.3 in AGB)
3. Acronym Protection (Apply to TMCH, Operational Issues, Sunrise, Claims)
4. INGO Protection (Qualification Criteria, Protection Mechanisms)
5. Chair’s statement on Consensus Call & Initial Report
6. Confirm next meeting (15 May 2013 @ 16:00 (120 MIN))
Action Items
1. None
Adobe Chat Transcript 8 May 2013
Berry Cobb:Welcome to the 8 May 2013 IGO-INGO Conference Call.
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):greetings to all
Alan Greenberg:long wait on bridge today...
Chuck Gomes:I am on the call as well
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):yes, same here
Alan Greenberg:3 minutes ...
Judd Lauter (IOC):James Bikoff and David Heasley are on the call
Alan Greenberg:on now
Mason Cole:sorry to be late...waiting for operator
Glen de Saint Gery:Jim Bikoff and David Maher have just joined
Mason Cole:On the line now
Evan Leibovitch:Hi there. I just came on the call but now find an personal issue forces me to step away for about 20 minutes. Back then.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):We have already expressed our serious concerns with a reserved list of terms (including ISO) where longstanding rights owners have to ask permission from an IGO to use their trademark name. Removing terms (like ISO or words/names/country codes) from registration at the top level, except with a rigorous progress unimposed on other rights holders is simply, from our view, unacceptable.
Alan Greenberg:That PRESUMES that they are added to today's reserved names list as opposed to some new mechanism with exceptions built in.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):That's right Alan.
Avri Doria:UYes, is a new special reserved names list and mset of policy mechansmms were established then, the RESP would not be necessary. I am very much against the creation of a new reserved names list of set of mechanisms.
Avri Doria:... if a new ...
Avri Doria:Exactly, there is NO International law that forces a particlar policy decision.What weneed to determine is whehter there is bottom-up support for various policies.
Avri Doria:totaly support the seperation of RCRC and IOC dyad.
Avri Doria:The GAC is not an International Legal authority.
Avri Doria:It is one stakeholder among many, and its ADVICE is important but not binding.
wolfgang:We are moving in circles. It is indeed not a legal issue, it is a political question and a case whether the GAC or the Board has the final word.
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):+1 Greg
Alan Greenberg:sorry was cut off
Avri Doria:I think they are unecessary at the top level.
Avri Doria:and i am against doing it.
Alan Greenberg:i can hear
Avri Doria:they already are excluded becasue of similarity
Avri Doria:to existing names ccTLD
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Yes Alan you are correct.
David Roache-Turner:which is precisely why we need a reasonable mechanism based on objective criteria for scalable consent in appropriate cases
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):particularly since we are talking about a VERY limited number of IGO names and acroyms - to assume that this would be overly complex is not correct
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):complex to manage under ICANN, I mean
David Roache-Turner:+1 ricardo - we need to keep the discussion in proportion
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Alan, some of the points you raise is exactly why we are opposed to a consent based mechanism. But also removing a term that happens to be our trademark and name from possible registration without possibly considerable and undue expense and process.
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):As for the IO, it's obvious that international law/domestic statutes cannot be subject to one person's decision - the mandate provided to the IO is extremely limited in this regard
David Roache-Turner:As for cost and process, initial reservation of IGO names + acronyms at both levels with a mechanism to enable agreed use by IGOs or potentially legitimate third party users on objectives criteria should not involve a consent mechanism that is unduly complex and preferably cost neutral to use. - provided consent is scalable in appropaite cases should also futher help to keepany need to use for legitimate users to a minimum, while also providing a measure of defacto protection for the concerned identifier or trademark of the third party
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):@Thomas: names AND acronyms, please
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):there is no difference under both international and domestic laws between the two things
David Roache-Turner:+1 ricardo, absolutely right
David Roache-Turner:whatever the scope of protection one would argue under 6ter of the Paris convention in the DNS,. absolutely clear that it draws no distinction between protected full names and acronyms
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Also, it may be very difficult to seek legal recourse against an IGO where consent was not appropriately given.
Avri Doria:It would not be the Applicant Support program, but something similar tailored to this issue
Thomas Rickert:Yes, Avri. Sorry for not being precise on that.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Agree with Alan.
David Roache-Turner:On the top level, the GAC advice at least is very clear on protection at the top level for IGO names and acronyms agasint third party registration in any future rounds of new gtlds on public policy grounds.
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):once more: we are talking about little more than 200 names/acronyms, NOT more than that. To assume that this is excessive for the purposes of ICANN reserved names is not reasonable, particularly given the almost infinite number of word/letter combinations for new gTLDs. Either we stick to existing legal principles or we risk moving to casuistic approaches
Alan Greenberg:To be clear, if we end up with a situation where the Intl Stds ORd can not apply for .ISO, when we make inumerable references to ISO-3166, would be, in my mind, a joke.
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):speaking of jokes, one of the best examples is to put a pronoun owned by nobody on top of the World Health Organization
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):+1 to the list-based approach, plus a possible objective mechanism as referred to by David
Avri Doria:Yeah but Tommy could object to .who as well.
Evan Leibovitch:soory. back in
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Alan, we cannot overemphasize our concern about that kind of restriction, or a consent based model. It doesn't reflect existing relationships among rights, and it doesn't reflect the real commercial and legal need and right to be able to use a trademark and name in a domain name (in which we in particular have more than 65 years of use, and extensive multinational trademark protection.)
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Not only do we actively use such domain names as our main one, iso.org, but also several hundred variations.
David Roache-Turner:I think his objection would be to "The Who", the band, not WHO, the IGO
Avri Doria:Thanks you David, I will find a better example for next time, but i think the point stands.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Should we be required to seek permission to register iso.standard (theoretically). And we are not the only potential legitimate user of such acronyms, or even ISO.
Avri Doria:i am glad to hear World Health would be ok with .thewho
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):But we've already presented these views in our joint ISO IEC proposal of last Friday.
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU): @Thomas: our views on TMCH are already presented in the email of today, so I won't extend myself further on this
Thomas Rickert:Thanks, Ricardo! Understood!
Avri Doria:n the first instanc ebing on the GAC list should qualify them as GAC-marked which could be sufficinet evidence.
Avri Doria:Ie. some provide evidence of Trademark while others provide evidence of GACmark.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):We indeed are interested.
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):@Mason Cole: so the Registrar opposition is merely on the basis of commercial interest on 200 strings out of an infinite number - legal rules/principles are totally set aside, it seems.
David Roache-Turner:Commercial attractiveness of IGO names as domain names really shouldn't be the driver for whether less than 200 IGO acronymns should be protected in the DNS, with an approrpiate mechanism to cover consent.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):We have both a commercial interest and well established trademark rights to use and register ISO.
David Roache-Turner:IGOs a renot commercial, but this could be covered by appropriate scalable consent so ISO (and any other portentially legitimate user of an identifier corresponding to a protected IGO name or acronym) could be covered in appropriate cases.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Again, we suggest the focus should be on actual reduction and prevention of cybersquatting. Not impeding or restricting rights and legitimate interests..
Alan Greenberg:Claudia +1
Evan Leibovitch:"Iso" is also a Danish supermarket chain. It is absolutely unreasonable, from a public interest PoV, to support blocking acronyms
David Roache-Turner:Claudia, fully agree - which is what reservation of IGO names + a reasonable, scalable consent mechanism should help acheive for those with identifiers covered by those on the llist
Mason Cole:Ricardo, I think that's an unfair characterization to say it's based simply on an interst in money. As I said, registrars have many customers who have legitimate interests in various acronyms, and we're looking for a balanced approach that keeps customer interest in mind. As I've also said, I am working with the registrars to find common ground. I hope that's been made clear.
Alan Greenberg:The concept of some level of acronym protection is fine. But it MUST be done with recognition that many acronyms are not unique. So protection of a strings MUST be associated with how it will be used.
Mason Cole:Registrars are quite sure, for example, many of their customers have uses for the "ISA" string beyond the exclusive remit of the International Seabed Authority
David Roache-Turner:Alan, are there "many" such acronyms; so far we have only seen a few conrete examples (such as ISO) which need to be workably addressed, but the challenge and any response perhaps needs to be seen in that relative light
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):David, we have some serious concerns about a consent based model, which we oppose.
Alan Greenberg:Claudia +1
David Roache-Turner:thanks Claudia, that's understood, just tyring to find workable compromise here.
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):@Thomas: we will take a look into those questions, thanks
Thomas Rickert:Thx
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):@Thomas: one thing I can already express here, related to the RySG recommendation - there is NO basis for separation between acronyms and full names, and no legal justification for such; not to mention that MOST if not ALL IGOs on the Internet use their acronyms instead of full names as identifiers
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):David, I appreciate the spirit of compromise, including as an INGO which is requesting special protection itself. However, we cannot underestimate the importance of truly workable and appropriate protections that reflect the existing complex landscape of multinational, national and international legal protections, including the subtleties of coexisting rights (and, preexisting rights).Again, we need to focus on avoiding cybersquatting of IO names, without creating greater rights or undue restrictions on existing rights.
David Roache-Turner:lets take a look indeed, though at first blush a TMCH-like structure specifically for IGOs distinguishing the rights and scope from those which may be approrriate for commercial traemarks, and addressing other specific porblems such as duration and cost may be a potentially interesting idea, though it would seem to be significantly more complex than the preventive list-based approach with a simple, cost neutral mechanism to manage any coexistence which IGOs have been proposing and would clearly prefer to support
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):or do you really think that we are supposed to protect ".UnitedNationsConferenceonTradeandDevelopment" instead of ".unctad"? This would be more than ludicrous from a legal/public policy perspective.
David Roache-Turner:+ 1 ricardo - IGO's use their acronmyns to identify themselves and that is where the real risk of confusion with their public missions lies
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):And to Evan, agree. Our worry is about fradulent uses of ISO (which we deal with on a daily basis) not restricting other non-confusing and legitimate uses.
Evan Leibovitch:UNCTAD is an obvious estreme example. So is UNICEF. But most three-letter acronyms have mutltiple uses and this whoul;d NOT be protectcable.
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):sorry but this is not a matter of length of strings - it's a matter of principle and conformity with international/domestic laws
Evan Leibovitch:That's your opinion
Avri Doria:Lets just admit that ICANN needs to define a new form of mark called GACmark - and then the TMCH pretty much works as it is designed to work. the only change is to admission control.
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):Not mine, it is the opinion of countries when agreeing on international treaties and domestic laws
Avri Doria:And who know, maybe acronyms can be listed within the TM+50
Avri Doria:i mean GM+50
Mason Cole:@Ricardo, if it were that easy, we wouldn't still be discussing it. Nor would registrar customers have SADC.net for an alarm company website. The South African Development Community would already have that and other names
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):I know it, Mason - just reiterating the principles/rules. I don't mean to say that they are applied/respected in the DNS/by ICANN
Evan Leibovitch:or need to be
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):@Avri: Sorry, what you mean by GM+50?
Greg Shatan:TM+50 is limited to strings which have been the subject of a winning judicial or UDRP decision in favor of the brandowner, so it's unlikely that TM+50 would cover acronyms except by sheer coincidence.
David Roache-Turner:IGOs are not seeking TM + 50, not least because the 50 requires an ability to access the UDRP to obtain decisions finding confusing similaritym, which IGOs in general still dont have.
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):moreover, IGOs do NOT submit to domestic jurisdictions/courts
David Roache-Turner:which is why any TMCH-like solution (or UDRP-like mechanism for IGOs) would need to address that aspect in particular, among others; absolutely right ricardo.
David Roache-Turner:Avri, just to be clear, IGOs are not the ones seeking TM equivalent protection; we are seeking protection appropriate for IGOs.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):What would that mean for a consent based model.
David Roache-Turner:Claudia, do you mean under a TMCH-like model?
David Roache-Turner:its a right to register, exactly
Mason Cole:all, i will be back in approx 10 minutes
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):dear all, I am gonna have to leave very soon. Look forward to continuing discussions by email
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):@Thomas: tks again for moderating this; we will come back with further considerations following these talks
David Roache-Turner:Alan, just to clarify that IGOs don't have marks as such, they have protected names and acronyms which preclude certain others from registering trademarks in circumstances where these would suggest a connection with the protected IGO.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):No, David. I’m raising questions about the interplay between immunities and a consent based reserved listed.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):list.
Avri Doria:I acknowledge that my viewpoint is a minority postion. There is uniwillingess in the NCSG on sunrise. We will be discussing it further.
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):Claudia, this would either lead to bilateral negotiations, use of specific processes or, in the extreme situation and as agreed by the organizations concerned, arbitration
Alan Greenberg:TMCH-like protection does not preclude further other protections, but let's take them one at a time.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Thank you Ricardo. It's good to think about this as well.
David Roache-Turner:thanks Claudia for the clarification; agree with Ricardo these would need to be resolved at first instance though, by a simple, cost-neutral, consent based process on objective criteria.
David Roache-Turner:full-barbitration would indeed by for more extreme examples
Alan Greenberg:I *LIKE* that term! BARBITRATION!
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU)::)
David Roache-Turner:meant full-blown, sorry, but thats indeed a good if mistaken creation of a word
Alan Greenberg:Short for Barbarian-Arbitration!
Alan Greenberg:Done with large clubs
David Roache-Turner:Lets trya nd keep that at the gates!
Evan Leibovitch:used in the UBRP
David Roache-Turner:a barbitration would probably charge like a wounded bull
Alan Greenberg:Good level on which to conclude this meeting chat.
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):it's always good to end with a laugh
David Roache-Turner:indeed ;) need to sign off after Claudia concludes, with appologies for the early departure, and thanks to all
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):Claudia's suggested text for INGOs seems to be in line with the higher flexibility that this group has to propose policy for these specific types of organizations - we will be glad to take a closer look at it
Avri Doria:I find that Claudia's proposal could fit with my proposals.
Avri Doria:For me IGO and INGO protections should be equivalent.
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):no, as the legal grounds are totally distinct
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):having said the above, Claudia's suggestions seem to be very sensible, provided they are applied on a non-discriminatory basis for ALL INGOs
Evan Leibovitch:+1 Alan
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Thanks Alan, we agree.
David Roache-Turner:+1 ricardo, though good to hear Avri appears not to have any objection to the scope of protection contemplated for INGOs
Evan Leibovitch:It's about protection, not entitlement
Evan Leibovitch:Which goes back to the previous issues about harm reduction
Avri Doria:David, I support full objection and dispute resolution capablities for all IGO/INGO.
Evan Leibovitch:As do I
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Thank you Greg. For me and Guilaine, we took a very pragmatic approach, reflective of our very real daily concerns.
Evan Leibovitch:ALAC has stated repeatedly that NGOs such as Oxfam and MSF are as vulverable, and is some cases moreso, than the IGOs arguing here for protection
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):We hope it's pragmatic, and we trust others will find ways to finetune
David Roache-Turner:We should all strive for pragmatism here
Avri Doria:Ican come back with tweaks for INGO over the next week.
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):ample evidence has been shown of harm against IGOs - to delve into that or relativize the matter for IGOs is totally unnecessary
David Roache-Turner:absolutely Ricardo
Evan Leibovitch:The evidence is insufficient, on a blanket level
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):if we were to believe that, then we should conclude that t is insufficient for all
Evan Leibovitch:OK
David Roache-Turner:Evan, what evidence would you need in addition to that which we have already seen in this group? The earlier report we saw of abuse was compelling, and likely on the tip of the iceberg.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Agreed Avri.
Ricardo Guilherme (UPU):bye/good night to all - tks for the exchanges
Alan Greenberg:Wolfgang gave one example of a suitable list of INGO a LONG time ago
David Roache-Turner:likewise all, goodnight, with thanks for the rich exchanges.
Claudia MacMaster Tamarit (ISO):Echoed fully.
Greg Shatan:Agree with Avri
Evan Leibovitch:@David: Some IGOs have problems with cybersquatting and fraud, some don't. some have acronyms with non-infringing acronyms, some don't. As I said, it's unreasonable on a blanket level.
Evan Leibovitch:acronyms with non-infringing use
Avri Doria:i will be at WTPF next week and will miss that call if it happens.
