Re: [council] Proposed motions for IGO DRP
- To: Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [council] Proposed motions for IGO DRP
- From: Robin Gross <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:00:18 -0800
- Cc: <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <005c01c8421d$efd81620$e601a8c0@PSEVO>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <64B79C3C-FA93-46B1-BB4C-B9A2D1B0A92A@acm.org> <015f01c84102$d368a610$7a39f230$@com> <53A45CB0-39C6-4F7C-A8A8-0F8C9F9D7D90@ipjustice.org> <email@example.com> <005c01c8421d$efd81620$e601a8c0@PSEVO>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I understand there was some talk on this issue 5 years ago, but that
was before my time. I've only served on this council for 3 years and
this is first time this request has crossed my desk. So I'm hoping
that those who were on the council 5 years ago when this issue was
discussed can say why this issue is so important we need to launch
into this particular PDP now.
I actually do think that if governments want to create special rights
for IGO's they should go through international legal institutions to
do that. Also if IGOs want the special rights, they can go through
the same legitimate processes to get those rights.
To make ICANN the 'go to place' for getting global policies that
cannot be achieved through legitimate legal processes is a bad
precedent for us to set. It invites bad policies that are forum
shopping for an easy venue.
On Dec 19, 2007, at 1:02 AM, Philip Sheppard wrote:
fast track - we've been talking about this for 5 years !
Do you guys really want to encourage governments (think Brazil,
China) to start a treaty on domain name protection ?
Do you really think they would stop at the small list of IGOs ?
Think IDN Treaty.
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx