I agree with the comments about the Olympics being commercial.

I’m afraid to say the Red Cross’ approach to/at ICANN to date leaves me skeptical here.

I also agree with the last comment and think it’s important to consider whether it works in theory.

Would it be acceptable to extend the privilege to the whole class of worthy/good causes/charities (or however the class might be defined)?

Best,

Victoria McEvedy

Principal

McEvedys

Solicitors and Attorneys

cid:669FC637-760A-4D2F-B56E-2C180C1870CC

81 Oxford Street,

London W1D 2EU.

T: +44 (0) 207 243 6122

F: +44 (0) 207 022 1721

M: +44 (0) 7990 625 169

www.mcevedy.eu

Authorized and Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority #465972

This email and its attachments are confidential and intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). This email and its attachments may also be legally privileged. If you have received this in error, please let us know by reply immediately and destroy the email and its attachments without reading, copying or forwarding the contents.

This email does not create a solicitor-client relationship and no retainer is created by this email communication.

From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of warigia bowman
Sent: 05 October 2011 12:21
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] NCSG input on request for special privileges for Red Cross & International Olympic Committee regarding Internet domains

I personally approve of giving special privileges to the Red Cross/Red Crescent, but not to the IOO.

The Red Cross is one of the only organizations I trust when I do fundraising for famine in East Africa.

Thanks, Rigia

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:25 AM, Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

I would be curious to know what the NCSG membership thinks about this proposal from GAC to give special privileges to the Red Cross and International Olympic Committee in the top-level domain name space.

The GNSO Council will have to vote on this proposal soon, so some awareness and input from the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group on the underlying issue would be very helpful.

http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/dryden-to-van-gelder-red-cross-14sep11-en.pdf

Thank you,

Robin Gross

Begin forwarded message:

From: Glen de Saint Géry <[log in to unmask]>

Date: September 19, 2011 11:07:42 AM PDT

To: liaison6c <[log in to unmask]>

Subject: [liaison6c] GAC advice: 1) possible UDRP 2) the IOC and Red Cross/Red Crescent

FYI

Dear Councillors,

The advice provided by the GAC has been posted on page :
http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence

And can be directly viewed at
http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/dryden-to-van-gelder-udrp-14sep11-en.pdf
http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/dryden-to-van-gelder-red-cross-14sep11-en.pdf

Item 11 on the GNSO Council agenda has been updated to read as follows:

Item 11: June 20 Board resolution on new gTLDs (15 minutes)

As part of its resolutions on the new gTLD program, the ICANN Board passed a resolved clause during its June 20 meeting in Singapore which contained the following excerpt (Resolved 1.b):

Refer to Board June 20 2011 motion on new gTLDs:

http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-20jun11-en.htm

Incorporation of text concerning protection for specific requested Red Cross and IOC names for the top level only during the initial application round, until the GNSO and GAC develop policy advice based on the global public interest.

The GNSO Council discussed this at its July 21 meeting. A letter was sent by Kurt Pritz to Heather Dryden & Stéphane van Gelder to provide some guidance:
http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/pritz-to-dryden-11aug11-en.pdf

On September 18, the GAC sent a letter to the GNSO Council providing advice on this topic:

GAC advice:

1) possible UDRP

2) the IOC and Red Cross/Red Crescent

The Council should now discuss next steps and possible courses of action, starting with an answer to the GAC.

11.1 Discussion
11.2 Next steps

Thank you very much.

Kind regards,

Glen

Glen de Saint Géry

GNSO Secretariat

[log in to unmask]