[At-Large] Bit that went out after NY and London

Fri Jul 17 08:47:21 CDT 2009

Sent the following comments out shortly after the New York and London
sessions:

Hi all -- 

I found odd 1) the Implementation Recommendations Team's presenting of
recommendations without taking up the impact they would have on
established legal trademark traditions, and 2) that ICANN had chosen
to set up a panel constituted of representatives of large trademark
interests -- after a more participatory process had already been
conducted within ICANN's Generic Names Supporting Organizations
policymaking process.

In the following video you can see the response I got to the above
questions:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfQrLVeFwcE

Here are Kathy Kleiman's comments for the Non-Commercial Users
Constituency (NCUC):
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgUC869bTVM

You can find more videos here (including Jay Sulzberger and Phil Corwin
so far):
> http://www.isoc-ny.org/?p=769

This page from the NCUC describes quite clearly what's happening in
terms of how the decision process has been conducted and constituted:
> http://ipjustice.org/ICANN/NCSG/NCUC-ICANN-Injustices.html

They are proposing to set up:

An IP Clearing House
A Globally Protected Marks list
A Uniform Rapid Suspension System
A Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Mechanism

Rebecca MacKinnon and Graham Chenoweth describe the issue of prior
restraint on free speech associated with this proposal here:
>
http://rconversation.blogs.com/rconversation/2009/07/icann-and-free-speech.html
>
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090621_mahmoud_ahmadinejad_globally_protected_marks_list_gpml/

You'll find the slides from the IRT's presentation here:
> http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/presentation-irt-13jul09-en.pdf

ISOC's Public Interest Registry had this to say:
> http://www.circleid.com/posts/comments_on_icanns_irt_final_report/

"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."

Two commentaries from Saul Hansell on the New York Times blog:

The Best Internet Addresses Will Cost a Cool .Million
>
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/the-best-internet-addresses-will-cost-a-cool-million/

Brokering Peace Between Brand Owners and Domainers
>
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/brokering-peace-between-brand-owners-and-domainers/

This is the overview/announcement for these meetings:
> http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/consultation-outreach-en.htm

There are two more, in Tokyo and Abu Dhabi, in the next couple of
weeks.  Have only heard dribs from the London meet so far.

Seth Johnson

David Farber wrote:
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: Seth Johnson <seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org>
> Date: July 9, 2009 6:09:28 PM EDT
> To: dave at farber.net
> Subject: NY-ers Needed to Stop Trademark Abuse at ICANN
> Reply-To: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org
> 
> Hi Dave -- anybody in New York who wants to call out the ICANN's
> "Implementation Recommendation Team" for their attempt provide tools
> for abusing trademark while they roll out the new Global Top Level
> Domains, needs to REGISTER BY TOMORROW here:
> 
> > http://www.registration123.com/ICANN/GTLD/
> 
> And then show up THIS MONDAY (sorry for the shouting, but those are
> the key terms in this message) at the Millenium Hotel, 145 West 44th
> Street.
> 
> See the blurb below my signature from Kathy Kleiman, among those who
> have been there from the inception of ICANN and watching out for all
> of us.
> 
> (Others in other cities, check out the schedule of meetings and get
> ready -- they are hitting several cities in a rapid fire fashion this
> month.)
> 
> The MPAA and International Trademark Association have had a hand in
> ICANN from its inception, when they prevailed in establishing the
> Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy.  Now, along with rolling out new
> global Top Level Domains, trademark holders are ramming through a new
> process that goes well beyond that.  They are pulling out the stops to
> get ICANN to implement what will in practical terms amount to a huge
> revision in the nature of trademark, backed by strong action on the
> part of ICANN.  Along with a new "Uniform Rapid Suspension System" to
> shut down sites quickly, they are establishing ICANN as playing the
> role of policing trademarks -- which by law is the trademark holders'
> responsibility.
> 
> Domain names don't match up with trademark law -- DNS is about giving
> symbols one universal address.  Language is not.  You don't trademark
> "Apple" -- you reserve the use of that trademark to market a
> particular kind of goods or service.  Thus we have Apple Computers and
> The Beatles' Apple music company.  Or Sun Oil in Canada, a completely
> separate company from Sun Oil in America -- and certainly not the same
> as the Sun computing company.  And trademark is also subject to fair
> use and of course free speech.
> 
> While of course this becomes a tool for draconian action in the area
> of domain names, it also sets the stage for a major revision in the
> basic conception of trademark policy, allowing this to extend further.
> 
> Seth Johnson
> (Random Internet Activist)
> 
> ICANN Public Consultation: Should New Top Level Domains Include Broad
> New Trademark Protections?
> 
> On Mon, July 13, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
> Numbers  (ICANN) will hold a public consultation at the Hudson
> Theatre,  Millennium Hotel, 145 West 44th Street, to discuss the
> "rules of the  road" for new generic top level domains (gTLDs), future
> competitors to  .COM, .ORG and .NET.
> 
> A group of trademark attorneys, representing large brand owners, in
> May wrote a report calling on ICANN to create broad new trademark
> protections before opening up new gTLDs.
> 
>    A. IP Clearinghouse: a massive database of registered and
>       unregistered trademark rights created by ICANN (IRT
>       Report, pp. 12-16
> 
>    B. Globally Protected Marks List: a list of global marks
>       created and maintained by ICANN (IRT Report, pp. 16-
>       22)
> 
>    C. Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS): A ultra-fast
>       takedown service with little notice or time to respond
>       by domain name registrants (IRT, pp. 25-37)
> 
> These proposals have been criticized as outside the mission and scope
> of  ICANN, a technical body, and outside the protections and limits
> of  trademark law. ICANN's Noncommercial Users Constituency writes "We
> fear the impact of the IRT Proposals on free speech and fair use
> online.  Trademark owners don't own strings of letters, they have a
> trademark for  specific goods and services. Basic words like APPLE,
> TIDE, SUN and TIME belong to all of us. Many important domain names
> will be lost, or worse,  blocked before they can be registered."
> 
> Approval of the IRT Report is being rushed through ICANN with minimal
> opportunity to comment. It is vital that ICANN hear comment as soon
> as  possible, and Monday is an opportunity to speak.
> 
> ICANN's Noncommercial Users Constituency will be hosting a breakfast
> at the Millennium Hotel on Monday morning. Please contact NCUC
> Co-Founder  Kathy Kleiman, kathy at kathykleiman.com
> <mailto:kathy at kathykleiman.com>,  for more details.
> 
> Registration to speak on 7/13 at this link (deadline 7/10):
> http://www.registration123.com/ICANN/GTLD/
> 
> IRT Report:
> http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-4-29may09-en.htm
> 
> IP Justice Comments:
> http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-final-report/msg00210.html
> 
> EFF Australia Comments:
> http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-final-report/msg00179.html
> 
> Noncommercial Users Constituency Website with comments:
> http://icann-ncuc.ning.com/