[ALAC] Red Cross/IOC - Questions for Consensus Call - Reply due by September 26th

[Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro]

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Hong Xue <hongxueipr at gmail.com> wrote:

> I made a careful study on the legal status of both organizations, and
> find that both IOC and RC are actually international Non-governmental
> organizations (NGOs). So, if there could be a holistic solution (DRP
> or else), it should cover all International Organizations (IOs),
> including international NGOs and IGOs. If we stick to the term IGOs,
> it could be no solution for IOC or RC at all.
>

This was also what the IOC-RC Drafting Team had to grapple with my comments
are below:

>
> Hong
>

Some of the key considerations that arose out of the Preliminary Issue
Report (and imagine the ones in the Final Issue Report) include:

·         enable the community to give feedback on the criteria for
protection and particularly whether these should include all International
Organizations, or all International Organizations which includes
Multinational Corporations or International Organizations that are not for
profit and are protected under multiple international treaties or statutes;

·         evaluate the breadth and scope of protections granted under these
Treaties and International law;


·         quantify entities that may need special protection and empirical
analysis as a precursor for PDP.

·         explore the exceptions to the “Exclusivity” and the spectrum of
exclusivity eg. Limited exclusivity noting the US example of prior use in
relation to a statute codifying protection of the Red Cross emblem save for
American Red Cross and how Johnson & Johnson’s trademark were using the Red
Cross in 1887 and have held exclusive rights to register the mark on its
commercial products for over a hundred years;

>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Hong Xue <hongxueipr at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> 5) Suggest an alternate robust method to protect non-trademarked
> >> public-interest names.
> >>
> >
> > Under FAG, IOC, RC and any other IGOs can file as many objections as
> > possible based on their IGO legal rights against TLD applications
> > identical or confusingly similar to their name(s). But no DRP
> > mechanism available for IGO names against 2nd-level domain name
> > registration, and all protection measures at 2nd-level are for
> > trademark, which makes the IGO names' protection unbalance at
> > top-level and second-level. If a dispute resolution policy could be
> > developed to enable IGOs to complain against abusive registrations at
> > second level, it would be good idea. But I object to changing the
> > current policy at this round and setting out a priorly-reserved name
> > list, let alone merely singling out 2 IGOs for special treatment.
> >
> > Hong
> >
> > --
> > Professor Dr. Hong Xue
> > Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL)
> > Beijing Normal University
> > http://www.iipl.org.cn/
> > 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street
> > Beijing 100875 China
>
>
>
> --
> Professor Dr. Hong Xue
> Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL)
> Beijing Normal University
> http://www.iipl.org.cn/
> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street
> Beijing 100875 China
> _______________________________________________
> 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)
>



-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
P.O. Box 17862
Suva
Fiji

Twitter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851