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 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vanda Scartezini" <vanda@uol.com.br> To: "'At-Large Worldwide'" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 8:58 PM Subject: Re: [At-Large] [GTLD-WG] IRT working group report
Bret You are right. I was there and remember all the issues (I am former president of Brazilian Patent Office and can easily understand why WIPO couldn't at the time an can't now move) I believe that the best contribution we can do is to suggest to WIPO to call for a new legal framework for the current system ( with more than 100 years) to fit into this new world. May last more than 2 years but once we have a better frame work all we need to do is follow international treats - I don't believe we can find a good solution for this problem inside ICANN- is too far out of our mandate. Best
Vanda Scartezini POLO Consultores Associados & IT Trend Alameda Santos 1470 cjs 1407/8 01418-903 Sao Paulo,SP. Fone + 55 11 3266.6253 Mob + 5511 8181.1464
-----Original Message----- From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Bret Fausett Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 8:52 PM To: gtld-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org; At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] [GTLD-WG] IRT working group report
With regard to the IRT's GPML, those who have been around ICANN since the beginning will remember that this is the second time we have been down the "globally protected" path. Back in 2000, it was called "globally famous."
Please see ICANN Board Resolution 00.17. It's quoted below.
The Board then, as it should now, referred the issue to WIPO, which could not resolve it because it was too politically contentious. The only the thing that the ICANN IP interests -- who are not the same players as the worldwide IP interests -- have changed is that they are calling this "globally protected" and have devised a brightline test for what constitutes "globally protected."
The fact that "globally protected" is easy to implement, however, does not make implementing it wise. The number of registrations selected is arbitrary, not agreed by the nations of the world as significant of anything at all, and still does not solve the political problems.
In 2000, the political problems with "globally famous" were twofold. First, the trademark community itself couldn't decide whether it liked the idea because giving "super protection" to one class of marks necessarily meant that some marks were quite so super. Companies with strong national and transnational marks, but not necessarily globally famous marks, stated that they'd rather have no super protection than not be included in the supermark category. (You can already see comments complaining about the GPML from trademark owners on the IRT comment board.)
A second issue, which we will see again with the so-called "GPML," is that giving special consideration to "globally protected" marks predominately benefits North American and Euro brands. It would largely exclude words like "UNITED" and "APPLE" and "MARS" from the TLD space, even making registering such words as an SLD the after effect of a UDRP-like process. People in parts of the world where United does not fly, where apples are the things that grow on trees, and where Mars is not a candy bar but a red dot in the evening sky will be limited in their use of language by Western labels. I appreciate that some folks will see nothing wrong with that, but it was politically contentious before, and I suspect it will be again.
So those of you who weren't here in 2000, read the resolution below and ask yourself why, if ICANN asked WIPO to do this before, was it not done? The answer is that WIPO couldn't navigate the idea through the political swamp. And if WIPO, an intellectual property organization, couldn't do it, what makes anyone think ICANN can?
-- Bret
P.S. Sometimes I think that I only stay involved in ICANN so I can be here when these history questions pop up. :-)
--
INFORMATION FROM WIPO
The Board resumed discussion on Mr. Cohen's suggestion that WIPO be requested to prepare a list of globally famous trademarks. Several Board members expressed concern that ICANN should not affirmatively promote an agenda for the protection of famous trademarks; those matters are more appropriately dealt with by governments and intergovernmental organizations such as WIPO, rather than a technical coordination body such as ICANN. Although having a list prepared by WIPO might be helpful to ICANN in coordinating technical matters in a manner that does not unnecessarily clash with intellectual property rights, ICANN should not take the lead in formally requesting preparation of such a list. As a result, the Board agreed that it was more appropriate to simply note the utility of such a list, rather than making a formal request.
Upon motion duly made and seconded, the Board unanimously approved the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas, the World Intellectual Property Organization in its April 30, 1999 report to ICANN has offered to prepare a list of globally famous trademarks;
RESOLVED [00.17] that the Board notes such a list would be helpful to its assessment of proper action on expansion of the TLD space.
http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/minutes-10mar00.htm _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann .org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ 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