Grande Carlos,


What about this is objectionable?


*"What does it mean to demand respect for international law in one phrase
and then demand that Amazon and Patagonia, both holders of trademarks
recognized under international law, be denied the right to use their
trademark in a TLD simply because some governments don’t want them to? On
what law is the GAC’s request to deny these applications based?"*
*
*
*What part of the Guidebook allows the GAC to object to these strings?*
*
*
-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
* *

On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Carlos A. Afonso <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> While I agree with most of the doc, I do not agree (along with many civil
> society orgs & movements) with the arguments in the paragraph mentioning
> .amazon and .patagonia. Please leave these arguments to the commercial
> interest groups.
>
> fraternal regards
>
> --c.a.
>
> sent from a dumbphone
>
> On 9 May 2013, at 14:18, Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I agree.  These are solid comments and NCSG should endorse them.
>
> Thanks very much, Milton, for the difficult work of drafting and
> re-drafting to incorporate the views of others.
>
> Best,
> Robin
>
>
> On May 9, 2013, at 10:49 AM, McTim wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Milton L Mueller <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Today in domain incite the writer starts his blog post with:
>> " For the last few weeks I've been attempting to write a sensible
>> analysis of the Governmental Advisory Committee's advice on new gTLDs
>> without resorting to incredulity, hyperbole or sarcasm"
>>
>> Exactly what I felt when I took on the task!!
>>
>> So it took him a few weeks to work it out of his system. Can you all
>> forgive me - or perhaps respect me - for taking only one week?
>>
>> I have revised the GAC comments. They are tamer. They eliminated one
>> mistake that Kathy pointed out to me. the bow to division within NCSG
>> regarding closed generics. But they still drive home what are absolutely
>> essential points that MUST be made, and made strongly, in this important
>> comment period. Please take a fresh look.
>>
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1d6GT0zqLjU6e7Js-TE2Gjlm_-B5xvhE5CrRPZSV3oV4/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
>
> I am happy with the re-write in terms of tone and substance.
>
> It is important that we make a solid statement about this to the Board, as
> it gives them political "cover" to say no to the GAC.
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
> indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>
>
>