ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [council] Revised Statement of work for working group on protecting the legal rights of others


Hi,

Unfortunately I missed the meeting where this was finalized. but since it seems that the wording is not fully understood, I have a few concerns/questions and some recommendations.

On 19 feb 2007, at 21.01, Bruce Tonkin wrote:

A.

As part of the new gTLD committee's deliberations, there has been some
discussion about what additional protections beyond the current terms in
the registration agreement and existing dispute resolution mechanisms
should be in place to the protect the legal rights of others during the domain name registration process, particularly during the initial start up of a new gTLD where there is contention for what Registrants perceive
as the "best" names.



When we spoke about this topic, I though the topic was to review such considerations in general and not to focus on what additional protections beyond those currently in practice would be needed. I would therefore recommend removing 'additional' and [beyond the current terms in the registration agreement and existing dispute resolution mechanisms].

It could therefore read:

As part of the new gTLD committee's deliberations, there has been some
discussion about what protections
should be in place to the protect the legal rights of others during the
domain name registration process, particularly during the initial start
up of a new gTLD where there is contention for what Registrants perceive
as the "best" names.

B.

First a typo

H.      Impact on other affect parties

should be affected parties

And as this one is rather unspecific, I would suggest adding something like:

including potential registrants from the general public. I.e. it would read:

H. Impact on other affect parties including potential registrants from the general public.

C.


Another question I have is what is the relation between this group and the IDN considerations group. The use of IDNs and both translations and transliterations of marks is a complexity that does not seem to be covered in this charter. I am not sure that it is covered in the IDN charter either.

d. Finally to what extent is the enlarging scope of trademark rules that comes into play once IDNs are included taken into account by this or the IDN charter?

thanks
a.










<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>