[At-Large] [GTLD-WG] IRT working group report

[WWWhatsup]

At 05:06 AM 7/3/2009, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote:
>I've registered for the London event to take place on 15th July ( http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-12jun09-en.htm )
>and will essentially be defending this line: it is outside ICANN's mandate.
>Anyone else planning to be in London?
>
>Olivier


Good luck Olivier!


I note that remote participation is available via https://admin.na3.acrobat.com/_a819976787/outreach


Agenda: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/london-agenda-speakers-15jul09-en.pdf




===

The ALAC / NCUC 

Joint Statement on the IRT Report

https://st.icann.org/gnso-liaison/index.cgi?joint_statement_on_the_irt_report_from_alac_and_ncuc


A bit of reaction from the NYC session:

NY Times articles:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/the-best-internet-addresses-will-cost-a-cool-million/

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/brokering-peace-between-brand-owners-and-domainers/

A long think piece from Rebecca Mckinnon supporting NCUC positions
http://rconversation.blogs.com/rconversation/2009/07/icann-and-free-speech.html

An essay, quoted in the above, that suggests the Global Protected Marks List involves prior restraint of free speech
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090621_mahmoud_ahmadinejad_globally_protected_marks_list_gpml/

and finally, ISOC's own Public Interest Registry's comments
http://www.circleid.com/posts/comments_on_icanns_irt_final_report/

I quote from the latter:


>We believe the Final Report puts too much emphasis on obliging
>registries to enforce trademark rights, in place of requiring ICANN
>to devote more resources to enforcing its contracts with registrars.
>We also believe that ICANN already has the legal tools to deal with
>the admittedly rare instances where a registry is in business to
>profit from trademark infringement. Adding a new legal process and
>giving rights to outsiders who are not parties to the ICANN-registry
>agreements is likely to increase litigation and its expense for all
>concerned. It is not likely to deal effectively with the real
>problems of cybersquatting.








Joly MacFie 
212 608 1334
http://wwwhatsup.com
http://punkcast.com  
http://pinstand.com