[ALAC] GAC Communiqué from Toronto
Alan Greenberg
alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Mon Oct 22 20:15:31 UTC 2012
For the record, the GAC did not use the term "international law", it
was "international legal instrucments" which if I remember correctly,
are agreements between countries. Presumably any action against use
of the terms would be at a national level (or UDRP for registered
names if also registered as trrademarks).
Alan
At 22/10/2012 02:32 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Re; RCRC Movement
>
>If it is International Law, than why has this never been acted on in
>any International court. There must certainly be second level
>infringements in the incumbent gTLDs of the constraints the RCRC
>wishes put in place (I haven't checked, I am just assuming) that
>could have been judged in International
>tribunals. Certainly infringement of the RCRC movement symbols on
>a battlefield would have been challenged in the blink of an
>eye. Also, while the GAC can give valuable advice, it is not an
>arbtrar of International Law. Nor does it make law.
>
>I certainly think that the PDP should look into this seriously and I
>think the pointer to .int policy is a very useful clue. But I also
>agree with those who say this is an ICANN policy matter. In the
>absence in rulings by duly constituted tribunals at the correct
>International level, it is for the muti-stakeholder ICANN process to
>develop and apply policy that meets the existing International
>requirements to the best of our understanding.
>
>I look forward to the PDP WG. I have, incidentally, reached out to
>one of my teachers, a veteran of the IFRC, from the Diplo
>Humanitarian Diplomacy course (where I learned an immense amount
>about the IFRC & RCRC movement), to join the WG when it forms. He
>will certainly raise the level of discussion.
>
>avri
>
>
>On 20 Oct 2012, at 21:36, Alan Greenberg wrote:
>
> > - 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.
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>ALAC mailing list
>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
>At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>ALAC Working Wiki:
>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
More information about the ALAC
mailing list