[ALAC] GAC Communiqué from Toronto

[Ron Sherwood]

Good morning, Carlton and Alan:

It seems to me that there is conflicted reasoning in the GAC Communiqué
from Toronto.

*"> - The GAC is questioning the need to have a PDP to protect the
RC/IOC names since in their mind, the international instruments and
national laws should be sufficient."*

      *If:*      "the international instruments and national laws should be
sufficient."...
*Then:*      Why the specific request for protection of these two entities
in the first place?

Best regards, Ron

On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at gmail.com
> wrote:

> Thanks for circulating this , Alan.
>
> It makes sense the list of those IGO for automatic protection begin with
> those eligible for .int registration. That may even have a few competing
> for acronyms.
>
> Given the method of developing the list, we need to keep a sharp eye on
> the extended list for protection.
>
> The argument regarding IOC/ROC needs further study since these may not
> enjoy the same rights and/or duties and/or responsibilities in the law of
> the several jurisdictions. This is where I think a PDP might be useful to
> ferret out those facts.
>
> - Carlton
>
> ==============================
> Carlton A Samuels
> Mobile: 876-818-1799
> *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround*
> =============================
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
> >wrote:
>
> > http://tinyurl.com/ICANN-GAC-**Toronto<
> http://tinyurl.com/ICANN-GAC-Toronto>and attached for your convenience.
> >
> > Several things of particular note:
> >
> > - The GAC is insisting that for ALL new gTLDs andnot just
> Community TLDs, the commitments made in their applications must be
> incorporated into their contracts and subject to compliance oversight.
> >
> > - The GAC has added IGOs to the list of organizations to be
> protected prior to the delegation of the first new TLD, and that this
> protection be given to those IGOs who are eligible for registration under
> .int. They have committed, however, to develop a list of names and acronyms
> that should be protected (since registries cannot work from the .int
> criteria themselves).
> >
> > - The GAC is questioning the need to have a PDP to protect the
> RC/IOC names since in their mind, the international instruments and
> national laws should be sufficient.
> >
> > Alan
>