As far as the issue of charitable names being exploited for fraudulent purposes, as discussed by Evan and Milton - it seems to me, from discussions with the charities, that the *real* solution that the charities need (and not just the ICRC, with its unique legal protections, but ANY charity) is basically a takedown solution like those provided by the APWG etc. Fraud is fraud, we need good solutions to stop fraud - but not only will special rules for the ICRC not have a large effect on fraud targeted against charities in general, it won't even eliminate fraud against the ICRC - much fraud against the ICRC appears to use domain names that don't include the specific protected designations redcross etc, but just variations such as just somethingrc.org. If the specific redcross term and other protected designations were protected at the second level, we'd see fraudsters simply switch to less preferred names, such as variations on namerc type 2LD names, and 3LDs and such. And we've seen with financial phishing attacks that they'll happily use other domain names when they can - lacking a good appropriate name for their phishing site just slows them down a little. 
	Their is a fundamental difference between the ICRC arguments based on its special legal status, and arguments based on the ICRCs mission and specific operation concerns. The arguments based on the ICRCs special legal status are one thing. But the arguments based on the humanitarian mission and operational concerns of the iCRC could just as easily apply to organisations such as the MSF or UNHCR. I wish a lot more of the effort that has gone into the ICRCs arguments had gone into practical fraud takedown measures that would be applicable to all charitable organisations. 
	Cheers
		David