Apologies for misunderstanding.
I interpreted:
>>>>>>>
Context: Given the tension here on the IOC and Red Cross exemption (some of us call it protection) and the Drafting Committee Chair report to GNSO this morning - we find it wise, for the benefit of our current and future NPOC members, as well as the ICANN Community at large, that NPOC promotes and supports a) the proposal from the WG and b), in
>>>>>>>
as support for the special treatment as described in the motions before the GNSO.
Avri
"klaus.stoll" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Dear Friends
>
>Just for clarification, the NPOC draft is not approving IOC/RC special
>treatment. What we want is to move away from specific organizations
>and
>names to a very clear definition of a very small but at the same time
>very
>deserving special treatment.
>
>Personally, I do not think that the IOC comes even near this and that
>we
>hope that we end up with something like UN +10 We should move the
>discussion from specific names to a particular group that can be
>clearly
>defined or decide that no protection is needed. The later seems to be
>the
>reasonable way, but at the same time not the realistic way.
>
>Yours
>
>Klaus
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Avri Doria
>Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 9:39 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Fwd: [npoc-voice] NPOC Proposal for IOC-RC protection
>
>Yes, I was speaking in general of Portugal's support for the idea that
>there
>were UN system and other organizations that merited the same
>treatment.
>This is what I associated to the NPOC proposal. Incidentally, like NPOC
>they
>support approving further IOC/RC special treatment as proposed in the
>various flavors of motion currently being discussed.
>
>I make no claim that Portugal and I support the same end result at this
>
>meeting. It is only in the fourth part of my proposed response that
>there
>its any similarity with my proposal:
>
>>Remember IOC & RC are already protected. Maximally protected. They do
>>not need further protection.
>>
>>Defer the motion because it is illegitimate for the g-council to vote
>>before the end of a comment period.
>>
>>Amend the motion to indicate that a change can only occur if the Board
>>agrees to restart the application clock. To make such a substantive
>>change to an ongoing process at this late date is fundamentally unfair
>>to applicants, especially noncommercial applicants or community
>>applicants.
>>
>>Support the idea brought up by both Portugal and NPOC that giving
>>preferential treatment to these two without full consideration being
>>given to the UN + 9 is prejudicial. If this its a serious concern for
>>ICANN and the GNSO, then initiate a PDP process on reserved names.
>>
>
>Avri
>
>
>
>Alain Berranger <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>Carlos, thanks for the clarification about Portugal.
>>
>>Alain
>>
>>
>>On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Carlos A. Afonso <[log in to unmask]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> Alain, I am not sure Portugal made the same proposal as NPOC's.
>>Portugal's
>>> is quite detailed and treats separately the actual case of IOC and
>>RC, and
>>> the proposal to embed in the rules the treatment of these cases
>based
>>on
>>> the characteristics of well defined types of organizations instead
>of
>>going
>>> on a case by case basis.
>>>
>>> I will look for the transcript.
>>>
>>> --c.a.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/13/2012 02:06 AM, Alain Berranger wrote:
>>>
>>>> Robin,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the clarification and the sense of direction the NCSG
>>needs to
>>>> take. It is interesting that Portugal made the same proposal as
>>NPOC. I
>>>> think we need to engage on substantive ideas on how to go forward.
>>The
>>>> UN+9/10 may just be a acceptable outcome down the road... we just
>>don't
>>>> know. It would be interesting to dig into the Portugal proposal.
>>>>
>>>> Alain
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Robin Gross<[log in to unmask]>
>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have to disagree, Adam. We need the community to engage in this
>>issue
>>>>> very much. This proposal is a not a final text, but a starting
>>point to
>>>>> try to reach a compromise. If it is "too late" for the community
>>to
>>>>> engage, it is because the RC/IOC came so late in the game. I
>don't
>>>>> believe
>>>>> the bottom-up policy development process should be shoved aside
>>because
>>>>> of
>>>>> AC/IOC's late request.
>>>>>
>>>>> Robin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 12, 2012, at 4:35 PM, Adam Peake wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Alain, hi.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Suggest it's a little late to be recommending such a fundamental
>>>>>> change to the applicant proces. Not going to fly. So let's not
>>waste
>>>>>> our time on it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Adam
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Adam Peake
>>>>>> GLOCOM Tokyo
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Alain Berranger
>>>>>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear NCSG Colleagues,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> FYI
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alain
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>>>> From: Jean-Louis Ecochard<[log in to unmask]>
>>>>>>> Date: Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 11:42 AM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [npoc-voice] NPOC Proposal for IOC-RC protection
>>>>>>> To: Alain
>>Berranger<alain.berranger@**gmail.com<[log in to unmask]>>,
>>>>>>> "[log in to unmask]"
>>>>>>> <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alain,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Merci de votre proposition.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One of the prime concern is the conversion of a known NGO domain
>>name
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> into a
>>>>>
>>>>>> gTLD.
>>>>>>> This is because a domain name is an NGO brand on the internet.
>>>>>>> We also know that words like relief, cancer, heart, peace,
>>nature, etc.
>>>>>>> cannot receive trademark protection yet they represent essential
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> internet
>>>>>
>>>>>> brands of the NGOs they represent.
>>>>>>> I believe ANY NGO with a strong internet brand presence would
>>find it
>>>>>>> disastrous to see their domain name converted into a gTLD (e.g.
>>In our
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> case
>>>>>
>>>>>> of nature.org seeing a .nature gTLD).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Henceforth I recommend we propose protection of any .org or
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> .org.country
>>>>>
>>>>>> domain name in active use by "Any organization operating globally
>>in the
>>>>>>> public interest and enjoying International Legal Personality in
>>the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> country
>>>>>
>>>>>> where its Headquarters are located, and its members." as of
>>January 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2012.
>>>>>
>>>>>> This means that ICANN would prohibit the creation of a gTLD that
>>is the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> same
>>>>>
>>>>>> as a domain name of an NGO in use 1/1/12 and active.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This ensures protection of the capital invested by NGOs on their
>>brand
>>>>>>> presence without making it too complicated for ICANN to
>>administer
>>>>>>> (I.e.
>>>>>>> Check for .org existence, check if own by NGO).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I welcome thoughts and discussions on this extension of Alain's
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> suggestion.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> JL
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> be green – read on the screen
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jean-Louis Écochard
>>>>>>> Vice President and Chief Information Officer
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Nature Conservancy
>>>>>>> New Zealand Office
>>>>>>> 126D Apotu Road, RD1
>>>>>>> Whangarei 0185
>>>>>>> New Zealand
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>>>>> +1.703.212.3999 (New Zealand Office US dial)
>>>>>>> +64.9.974.8195 (New Zealand Office)
>>>>>>> +1.703.841.5342 (Arlington World Office Phone)
>>>>>>> +1.703.273.0713 (Arlington World Office Fax)
>>>>>>> +1.703.841.5304 (Executive Assistant, Jennifer Manaloto)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Skype jecochard
>>>>>>> IM (MSN) [log in to unmask], (Yahoo& AIM)
>[log in to unmask]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Facebook jecochard
>>>>>>> Twitter @jecochard
>>>>>>> LinkedIn
>>http://nz.linkedin.com/in/**jecochard<http://nz.linkedin.com/in/jecochard>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Nature Conservancy www.nature.org
>>>>>>> NetHope www.nethope.org
>>>>>>> Conservation Commons www.conservationcommons.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "An individual without information can't take responsibility. An
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> individual
>>>>>
>>>>>> with information can't help but take responsibility."
>>>>>>> - Jan Carlzon, former President and CEO of the Scandinavian
>>Airlines
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Group
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: Alain Berranger
>>>>>>>
>><[log in to unmask]<**mailto:[log in to unmask]**com<[log in to unmask]>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 18:06:11 -0400
>>>>>>> To:<[log in to unmask]<**mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>>>>>>> Subject: [npoc-voice] NPOC Proposal for IOC-RC protection
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear NPOC members:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Greetings from San José. As Acting Vice Chair, I would like to
>>consult
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> you
>>>>>
>>>>>> on an important issue:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Context: Given the tension here on the IOC and Red Cross
>>exemption
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> (some of
>>>>>
>>>>>> us call it protection) and the Drafting Committee Chair report to
>>GNSO
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> this
>>>>>
>>>>>> morning - we find it wise, for the benefit of our current and
>>future
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> NPOC
>>>>>
>>>>>> members, as well as the ICANN Community at large, that NPOC
>>promotes and
>>>>>>> supports a) the proposal from the WG and b), in a broader
>manner,
>>the
>>>>>>> generic extension of this protection based on avoiding the
>>setting of a
>>>>>>> precedent, and based on objective and independantly verifiable
>>criteria
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> to
>>>>>
>>>>>> define who or who does not qualify:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Proposition:
>>>>>>> Would receive new gTLD protection: "Any organization operating
>>globally
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> in
>>>>>
>>>>>> the public interest and enjoying International Legal Personality
>>in the
>>>>>>> country where its Headquarters are located, and its members."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you for your attention to this important matter. Please
>>respond
>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>> Tuesday 13 March 17:00 San José time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alain Berranger
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
>>>>>>> Member, Board of Directors, CECI,
>>>>>>> http://www.ceci.ca<
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-**ceci/team/board-of-directors/<http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>>> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business,
>>>>>>>
>>www.schulich.yorku.ca<http://**www.schulich.yorku.ca<http://www.schulich.yorku.ca>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> Trustee, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation,
>>>>>>>
>>www.gkpfoundation.org<http://**www.gkpfoundation.org<http://www.gkpfoundation.org>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation,
>>>>>>>
>>www.chasquinet.org<http://www.**chasquinet.org<http://www.chasquinet.org>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> interim Membership Committee Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN,
>>>>>>> http://npoc.org/
>>>>>>> O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
>>>>>>> Skype: alain.berranger
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
>>>>>>> Member, Board of Directors, CECI, http://www.ceci.ca
>>>>>>> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> www.schulich.yorku.ca
>>>>>
>>>>>> Trustee, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation,
>>www.gkpfoundation.org
>>>>>>> NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
>>>>>>> interim Membership Committee Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN,
>>>>>>> http://npoc.org/
>>>>>>> O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
>>>>>>> Skype: alain.berranger
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
>>Member, Board of Directors, CECI,
>>http://www.ceci.ca<http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>
>>Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business,
>>www.schulich.yorku.ca
>>Trustee, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation,
>www.gkpfoundation.org
>>NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
>>interim Membership Committee Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN,
>http://npoc.org/
>>O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
>>Skype: alain.berranger
|
