<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] Response to ccNSO/GAC Issues report
- To: "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx>, "Council GNSO" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [council] Response to ccNSO/GAC Issues report
- From: cyrilchua@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 20:20:50 +0800
- Importance: Normal
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi Avri
We need to maintain the consistency because we do not want similar factual
disputes having different outcomes in gTLD and ccTLD.
Kind regards,
Cyril Chua
Partner
IP & Technology Group
--------
Alban Tay Mahtani & de Silva LLP
39 Robinson Road #07-01, Robinson Point, Singapore 068911
Tel: (65) 6534 5266 / Fax: (65) 6223 8762 / DID: (65) 6428 9812
http://www.atmdlaw.com.sg
--------
ALBAN TAY MAHTANI & DE SILVA LLP
< This message (including attachments) contains privileged and confidential
information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not to take any action
in reliance on it nor to disseminate, distribute, publish or copy this message. If
you have received this message in error, please accept our apologies, delete all
copies from your system and notify us at mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Unless it relates to
the official business of ATMD, any opinions or matters expressed in this message are
those of the individual sender. >
----- Original Message -----
From: Avri Doria [avri@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 02/12/2008 05:41 PM ZE5B
To: Council GNSO <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [council] Response to ccNSO/GAC Issues report
Hi,
While it would be inconsistent with the new gTLD policy
recommendations, I don't know if there is a necessity for consistency
in this case as we are dealing with ccTLDs not gTLDs and we are
dealing with significant expressions of a countries name or identity.
So the conditions might be different.
In terms of the statement I am not sure I know what Technical
confusion is any more then I really understood what confusingly
similar was. Are we saying it should not be visually or
homographically similar,? I also wonder if there is another problem
in this one. The name of a country in various representations will
be similar to the name of the country in another representation - but
in a sense that seems appropriate and not a problem.
a.
On 12 Feb 2008, at 16:28, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
That would be inconsistent with the recommendations made for new
gTLDs. We can't go back now and change what we already did.
Chuck
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
] On Behalf Of Robin Gross
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 5:53 AM
To: Avri Doria
Cc: Council GNSO
Subject: Re: [council] Response to ccNSO/GAC Issues report
How about:
"Strings that cause technical confusion should be avoided."
Thanks,
Robin
On Feb 12, 2008, at 1:43 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
On 12 Feb 2008, at 14:29, Robin Gross wrote:
**** THEREFORE, I propose that we amend our statement, so that
only "technical confusion" is the type of confusion that we deal
with. Otherwise, not only are we in contrast with legal norms,
we are also outside the scope of ICANN's authority.
Can you suggest the exact wording change you are proposing?
As with other suggested changes, I believe we can make if there are
no objections.
On the other hand, if there are objections, we may need to vote on
this amendment before voting on the response itself.
thanks
a.
IP JUSTICE
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
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|