[At-Large] Proposed ALAC statement on reserved names for the IOC and Red Cross

[Elisabeth Porteneuve]

Hi,

I went through the reserved names's PDF to recall myself the issue, 
however at that time the case of protection of organizations other that 
ICANN was not even addressed.

Today it's screaming that ICANN places itself above the other rights 
holders, while at the same time is creating instability for many 
organizations, and for the whole world.

With its private reserved list of names ICANN is not credible. The 
legislative body cannot set rules and make exception for itself -- not 
in a decent place.

ICANN is immoral to make an exception of itself from its own rules.


I have no idea how to address that issue, but it cannot simply be forgotten.

Elisabeth Porteneuve


cf. http://www.gnso.icann.org/drafts/icannimplementation-
doc-gnso-rswg-04sep07.pdf

Le 04/03/2012 23:51, Avri Doria a écrit :
> Hi,
>
>   I agree with the reply,
>
> However, if the issue of protected names and 'Strings Ineligible for Delegation' (the category created by BoardStaff for this round) is ever opened up to discussion and to policy process at a later time, then I beleive the special status given any name other than "example", should be reviewed as part of that exercise.  For this round, the issue of reserved names was discussed as part of the New gTLD PDP and in my opinion any changes would require another PDP.
>
> avri
>
>
> On 4 Mar 2012, at 17:28, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
>
>> Hi Elizabeth,
>>
>> The proposed statement is specifically to deal with the after-the-fact changing of the Applicant Guidebook regarding two specific organizations. The more general question of "why are all names in the reserved list there?" is well beyond its scope and long past useful debate.
>>
>> - Evan
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>
>
>