Thank you, Joly! Hello from the floor here at RIBA. They've implemented a WIFI network, and I can receive questions/comments (if you have any) and relay them to the panel. I'm sitting by John Levine (writer of "Internet for Dummies") & behind Konstantinos Komaitis (NCUC's representative here). I had breakfast with Dr. Komaitis & Richard Tindall (DemandMedia) earlier on, to look for satisfying solutions for everyone. Kind regards, O. ----- Original Message ----- From: "WWWhatsup" <joly@punkcast.com> To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 8:02 AM Subject: Re: [At-Large] [GTLD-WG] IRT working group report
At 05:06 AM 7/3/2009, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote:
I've registered for the London event to take place on 15th July ( http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-12jun09-en.htm ) and will essentially be defending this line: it is outside ICANN's mandate. Anyone else planning to be in London?
Olivier
Good luck Olivier!
I note that remote participation is available via https://admin.na3.acrobat.com/_a819976787/outreach
Agenda: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/london-agenda-speakers-15jul09-en.p...
===
The ALAC / NCUC
Joint Statement on the IRT Report
https://st.icann.org/gnso-liaison/index.cgi?joint_statement_on_the_irt_repor...
A bit of reaction from the NYC session:
NY Times articles: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/the-best-internet-addresses-will-co...
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/brokering-peace-between-brand-owner...
A long think piece from Rebecca Mckinnon supporting NCUC positions http://rconversation.blogs.com/rconversation/2009/07/icann-and-free-speech.h...
An essay, quoted in the above, that suggests the Global Protected Marks List involves prior restraint of free speech http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090621_mahmoud_ahmadinejad_globally_protecte...
and finally, ISOC's own Public Interest Registry's comments http://www.circleid.com/posts/comments_on_icanns_irt_final_report/
I quote from the latter:
We believe the Final Report puts too much emphasis on obliging registries to enforce trademark rights, in place of requiring ICANN to devote more resources to enforcing its contracts with registrars. We also believe that ICANN already has the legal tools to deal with the admittedly rare instances where a registry is in business to profit from trademark infringement. Adding a new legal process and giving rights to outsiders who are not parties to the ICANN-registry agreements is likely to increase litigation and its expense for all concerned. It is not likely to deal effectively with the real problems of cybersquatting.
Joly MacFie 212 608 1334 http://wwwhatsup.com http://punkcast.com http://pinstand.com
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org