-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ross Rader wrote:
Overall, I'm not as worried about getting movement on the commercial/non-commercial question as I am about getting movement on the intellectual property question. I, as with most individuals today, produce large tracts of intellectual property - photographs, blog posts, etc. Much of this has very little commercial value, but our rights in these works is no less important. It is very difficult (read: impossible) in the current iteration of ICANN to get airtime for individual intellectual property rights - big business (read: hollywood and the telco's) have moved in, taken over and completely control the agenda.
Room has to be made for those that don't necessary agree with the BigHollywood view of intellectual property.
While I (believe I) understand the issues you discuss, I need to also understand their relevance in an ICANN context. Just as Robert's free-speech bloggers in Cairo were important but completely irrelevant to ICANN's narrow scope, I need to understand how the issues you raise relate here. The IPC (for which I have no great fondness) concentrates on trademark and naming issues which are directly relevant. What you raise also appears to deal with Internet content, as opposed to naming or IP numbering issues. As part of an ALS that's very involved in copyright and the growing battle between creators and "rights holders", I am very sensitive to personal IP matters. What I haven't yet done myself is be able to (directly) link these issues to ICANN's mandate. - - Evan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJIZCqB6WWYxnsgmwRAvw5AKCapXdS5AfvLutrfdIaiUCS/imYqACeLjr5 D4NvAxAC2caeItWw+uor1xk= =uSqB -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----