Re: [ga] WIPO Letter to ICANN

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

What I do not get is this; Why hasn't someone who has been deeply and wrongly injured by this foul/disgusting/criminal conduct brought the offending parties to task?
  Is everyone who has been hurt by this afraid or too poor or too ignorant? That is hard to swallow.
   
  Or is it that, no matter how repulsive this behavior is, it breaks no law or contract or treaty?
   
  e

"Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
  seeing as ICANN never did the 2-year review of the UDRP which was supposed 
to moderate the UDRP's excesses....




On Sun, 20 Nov 2005, Danny Younger wrote:

> WIPO has sent a letter to ICANN which points out their
> ongoing concerns. I find myself sympathizing with
> their plight since their petition has gotten short
> shrift in the ICANN process (it has effectively been
> buried by ICANN Staff).
>
> In Capetown, the ICANN Board passed the following
> resolution:
>
> "Resolved (04.106) staff is requested to undertake
> further analysis of the comments expected during the
> public comment period, the staff to undertake to
> consult the community members with the purpose of
> drawing up a report based on all these elements that,
> together with an appropriate draft Recommendation to
> be submitted for public comments, and that the Board
> be informed of the results of these efforts, including
> if appropriate a Recommendation, at its meeting in Mar
> del Plata in April 2005."
>
> Not surprisingly, at the Mar del Plata session, no
> ICANN Staff "Recommendation" emerged, nor any report
> on consultations.
>
> It had earlier been noted that the purpose of the
> resolution was to see whether staff consultations with
> the full range of people in the community, would be
> able to find some space for middle ground and to
> determine that which might be feasible, practical and
> pragmatic.
>
> I, for one, (who actually posted comments on the topic
> -- see http://forum.icann.org/lists/wipo2-comments/ ),
> have not witnessed any staff consultations whatsoever.
> As I see it, the folks at WIPO have been jerked
> around by ICANN Staff and have been totally ignored by
> the ICANN Board.
>
> I'm not a great fan of WIPO, but I do believe that
> every group that petitions ICANN is entitled to a fair
> hearing and to a timely and definitive response to a
> petition.
>
> Their most recent letter is posted below:
>
>
> Dear Dr Cerf, Dr Twomey
>
> I am contacting you to inquire about the status of the
> recommendations made by WIPO in the context of the
> Second WIPO Internet Domain Name Process (WIPO-2
> Recommendations) to extend protection under the
> Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP)
> to country names and the names and acronyms of
> International Intergovernmental Organisations (IGOs).
>
> At the last WIPO General Assembly which took place in
> Geneva from
> September 26 to October 5, 2005, a number of
> delegations expressed concern with regard to the
> apparent lack of progress in the implementation of the
> WIPO-2 Recommendations. These delegations also
> requested the WIPO Secretariat to transmit this
> concern to ICANN.
>
> I would therefore be grateful if you could enable us
> to inform our member States as to how ICANN intends to
> proceed in this matter. As you will recall, the
> WIPO-2 Recommendations were transmitted to ICANN in
> February 2003. They were unanimously supported by
> ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee on a number of
> occasions. Unfortunately, the Working Group which
> you established to consider implementation issues
> focussed on issues other than implementation and,
> unlike the Working Group that developed the UDRP on
> the basis of WIPO's Recommendations
> made in the context of the First WIPO Internet Domain
> Name Process, failed to produce any agreed
> recommendations.
>
> At your request, WIPO subsequently submitted a
> briefing note providing further information on the
> issue as well as a draft confirming the (few)
> additions that would have to be made to the UDRP in
> order to implement the WIPO-2 Recommendations. The
> Comment Forum that you established in December 2004
> failed to trigger any substantive comments from the
> public.
>
> You will appreciate the concerns of countries with
> regard to the abuse of their country's names
> especially in new generic Top Level Domains. Please
> also note the very real concerns of IGOs concerning
> the protection of their names and acronyms which are a
> vital prerequisite for them to perform their
> functions. If anything, the abuse of IGO names and
> acronyms has increased over the last years and has
> caused a great deal of confusion among, and outright
> fraud directed at, consumers. Regrettably, such abuse
> also targets IGOs involved in humanitarian ,
> development and health-related activities.
>
> I hope that you will consider the issue further at
> your next meeting in Vancouver. My colleague Mr
> Christian Wichard will be attending the meeting and is
> available to meet with you should you so require.
>
> I look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Your sincerely,
>
> Francis Gurry
> Deputy Director General
> World Intellectual Property Organization
> WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
>
> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01546.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>

-- 
http://www.icannwatch.org Personal Blog: http://www.discourse.net
A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | froomkin@xxxxxx
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm
-->It's warm here.<--
  


		
---------------------------------
 Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.