NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Adam Peake <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Adam Peake <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 19 Jul 2012 22:58:43 +0900
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (80 lines)
How about a variation of 5, contract with

international law firm "to conduct a legal 
analysis to substantiate/verify whether there is 
clear evidence of treaty law and/or statutes that 
would require registries and registrars to 
protect IOC and RCRC names by law."

Not ICANN legal counsel.  Tender for an 
international legal firm (consortium of legal 
scholars?) to conduct analysis (there's about 
$357m in the TLD moneybox)

Adam



At 11:23 AM -0400 7/18/12, Avri Doria wrote:
>Begin forwarded message:
>
>>From: Brian Peck <<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]>
>>
>>Subject: [gnso-iocrc-dt] List of possible 
>>approaches for Red Cross/IOC names in new gTLDS
>>
>>Date: 18 July 2012 11:08:58 EDT
>>
>>To: 
>>"<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]" 
>><<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]>
>>
>>
>>List of possible approaches for Red Cross/IOC names in new gTLDS
>>In response to the request during the last 
>>RC/IOC DT call, please find below a list of 
>>possible approaches that have been proposed to 
>>date for moving forward in responding to the 
>>GAC proposal to protect the RCRC and IOC names 
>>at the second level in new gTLDS:
>>
>>1.	Maintain the status quo and not provide 
>>any new special protections for the RCRC/IOC 
>>names (i.e., no changes to the current schedule 
>>of second-level reserved names in the new gTLD 
>>Registry Agreement).
>>2.	Develop recommendations to implement the 
>>GAC proposal such as extending protection to 
>>all or a subset of RCRC names only, all or a 
>>subset of IOC names only or, to both sets of 
>>each organizationıs names.
>>3.	Consider the proposal to not provide any 
>>new protections now and wait to see if any 
>>additional protections may be necessary after 
>>the delegation of the first round new gTLD 
>>strings and/or consider lowering costs for each 
>>organization to utilize RPMs ( i.e., Thomas 
>>Rickertıs proposal)
>>4.	Consider possible additional protections 
>>for the RCRC/IOC as part of a broader PDP on 
>>the protection of names for international 
>>organizations
>>5.	Ask ICANN General Counselıs office to 
>>conduct a legal analysis to substantiate/verify 
>>whether there is clear evidence of treaty law 
>>and/or statutes that would require registries 
>>and registrars to protect IOC and RCRC names by 
>>law.  
>>
>>
>>Please let us know if you have any questions or 
>>need anything further at this time.  Thanks.
>>
>>Best Regards,
>>
>>Brian
>>
>>Brian Peck
>>Policy Director
>>ICANN

ATOM RSS1 RSS2