Re: [council] TMCH RPM Requirements draft document

[Wendy Seltzer <wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks, I share Volker's concerns.

On 10/01/2013 06:16 AM, Jonathan Robinson wrote:
> All,
> 
>  
> 
> We have a full agenda developing for the 10 October 2013.  
> 
>  
> 
> It will be helpful to have other comments on this along the lines of:
> 
>  
> 
> 1.       Is this an issue for the Council?

Yes

> 
> 2.       If so:
> 
> a.       Do you have similarly felt or related / connected concerns?

Yes

> 
> b.      Is this a unusual / unique / a precedent?
> 
> c.       What should the Council be doing about it?

The draft should treat all constituencies equally -- all should be given
the same level of reference and communications support.

--Wendy

> 
>  
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Jonathan
> 
>  
> 
> From: Volker Greimann [mailto:vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: 01 October 2013 09:33
> To: Marika Konings
> Cc: Glen de Saint Géry; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [council] TMCH RPM Requirements draft document
> 
>  
> 
> Hi Marika,
> 
> thank you for that clarification. While this relieves part of my concern, I
> still feel that "baking" a single constituency into such a process and
> handing out special benefits is not the proper procedure for a
> multi-stakeholder organization, even if it is an opt-in process for the
> applicant.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Volker
> 
> Dear All,
> 
>  
> 
> Please find below a response from Cyrus Namazi in relation to the paragraph
> referred to by Volker.
> 
>  
> 
> Best regards,
> 
>  
> 
> Marika
> 
>  
> 
> In response to community input, the TMCH Requirements were revised to allow
> registry operators the ability to submit applications to conduct launch
> programs.  In response to the large number of Geo TLDs who voiced similar
> concerns, the IPC publicly stated that it would be willing to work with Geo
> TLDs to develop mutually acceptable language for Geo TLD launch programs.
> We viewed this proposal as a way for community members to work collectively
> to propose to ICANN a possible solution for an issue specifically affecting
> intellectual property rights-holders and Geo TLDs.  Any such proposal will
> be subject to ICANN's review and ICANN has expressly stated that any such
> proposal may be subject to public comment in which other interested
> community members may participate. This is captured in Section 4.5.3.
> 
>  
> 
> As an alternative, applicants can unilaterally apply for a program exemption
> under another provision of the requirements (Section 4.5.2).  IPC was added
> to facilitate the discussion; not a condition to that requirement. 
> 
>  
> 
> From: Volker Greimann <vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Monday 30 September 2013 19:03
> To: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [council] TMCH RPM Requirements draft document
> 
>  
> 
> Dear fellow councillors,
> 
> in the last week ICANN has released a final draft version of the TMCH RPM
> Requirements, which contains in section 4.5.3 a paragraph that I find to be
> questionable:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.5.3If registry operators that indicated in their applications for their
> TLDs that their TLD would be a geographic name (“Geo TLDs”) and
> representatives of the Intellectual Property Constituency recommend to ICANN
> the creation of a registration program (...)
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Further, stakeholder groups and constituencies may change over time, so
> referencing one in such a process description may cause problems down the
> line.
> 
> I feel this topic needs to be raised on the council level as this is only
> the most recent example of ICANN staff acting unilaterally in favoring one
> interest over others. 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx +1 617.863.0613
Policy Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project
http://wendy.seltzer.org/
https://www.chillingeffects.org/
https://www.torproject.org/
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/