Sent the following comments out shortly after the New York and London sessions: Hi all -- I found odd 1) the Implementation Recommendations Team's presenting of recommendations without taking up the impact they would have on established legal trademark traditions, and 2) that ICANN had chosen to set up a panel constituted of representatives of large trademark interests -- after a more participatory process had already been conducted within ICANN's Generic Names Supporting Organizations policymaking process. In the following video you can see the response I got to the above questions:
Here are Kathy Kleiman's comments for the Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC):
You can find more videos here (including Jay Sulzberger and Phil Corwin so far):
This page from the NCUC describes quite clearly what's happening in terms of how the decision process has been conducted and constituted:
They are proposing to set up: An IP Clearing House A Globally Protected Marks list A Uniform Rapid Suspension System A Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Mechanism Rebecca MacKinnon and Graham Chenoweth describe the issue of prior restraint on free speech associated with this proposal here:
http://rconversation.blogs.com/rconversation/2009/07/icann-and-free-speech.h...
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090621_mahmoud_ahmadinejad_globally_protecte... You'll find the slides from the IRT's presentation here:
http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/presentation-irt-13jul09-en.pdf
ISOC's Public Interest Registry had this to say:
http://www.circleid.com/posts/comments_on_icanns_irt_final_report/
"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." Two commentaries from Saul Hansell on the New York Times blog: The Best Internet Addresses Will Cost a Cool .Million
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/the-best-internet-addresses-will-co... Brokering Peace Between Brand Owners and Domainers
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/brokering-peace-between-brand-owner... This is the overview/announcement for these meetings:
http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/consultation-outreach-en.htm
There are two more, in Tokyo and Abu Dhabi, in the next couple of weeks. Have only heard dribs from the London meet so far. Seth Johnson David Farber wrote:
Begin forwarded message:
From: Seth Johnson <seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> Date: July 9, 2009 6:09:28 PM EDT To: dave@farber.net Subject: NY-ers Needed to Stop Trademark Abuse at ICANN Reply-To: seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org
Hi Dave -- anybody in New York who wants to call out the ICANN's "Implementation Recommendation Team" for their attempt provide tools for abusing trademark while they roll out the new Global Top Level Domains, needs to REGISTER BY TOMORROW here:
And then show up THIS MONDAY (sorry for the shouting, but those are the key terms in this message) at the Millenium Hotel, 145 West 44th Street.
See the blurb below my signature from Kathy Kleiman, among those who have been there from the inception of ICANN and watching out for all of us.
(Others in other cities, check out the schedule of meetings and get ready -- they are hitting several cities in a rapid fire fashion this month.)
The MPAA and International Trademark Association have had a hand in ICANN from its inception, when they prevailed in establishing the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy. Now, along with rolling out new global Top Level Domains, trademark holders are ramming through a new process that goes well beyond that. They are pulling out the stops to get ICANN to implement what will in practical terms amount to a huge revision in the nature of trademark, backed by strong action on the part of ICANN. Along with a new "Uniform Rapid Suspension System" to shut down sites quickly, they are establishing ICANN as playing the role of policing trademarks -- which by law is the trademark holders' responsibility.
Domain names don't match up with trademark law -- DNS is about giving symbols one universal address. Language is not. You don't trademark "Apple" -- you reserve the use of that trademark to market a particular kind of goods or service. Thus we have Apple Computers and The Beatles' Apple music company. Or Sun Oil in Canada, a completely separate company from Sun Oil in America -- and certainly not the same as the Sun computing company. And trademark is also subject to fair use and of course free speech.
While of course this becomes a tool for draconian action in the area of domain names, it also sets the stage for a major revision in the basic conception of trademark policy, allowing this to extend further.
Seth Johnson (Random Internet Activist)
ICANN Public Consultation: Should New Top Level Domains Include Broad New Trademark Protections?
On Mon, July 13, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) will hold a public consultation at the Hudson Theatre, Millennium Hotel, 145 West 44th Street, to discuss the "rules of the road" for new generic top level domains (gTLDs), future competitors to .COM, .ORG and .NET.
A group of trademark attorneys, representing large brand owners, in May wrote a report calling on ICANN to create broad new trademark protections before opening up new gTLDs.
A. IP Clearinghouse: a massive database of registered and unregistered trademark rights created by ICANN (IRT Report, pp. 12-16
B. Globally Protected Marks List: a list of global marks created and maintained by ICANN (IRT Report, pp. 16- 22)
C. Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS): A ultra-fast takedown service with little notice or time to respond by domain name registrants (IRT, pp. 25-37)
These proposals have been criticized as outside the mission and scope of ICANN, a technical body, and outside the protections and limits of trademark law. ICANN's Noncommercial Users Constituency writes "We fear the impact of the IRT Proposals on free speech and fair use online. Trademark owners don't own strings of letters, they have a trademark for specific goods and services. Basic words like APPLE, TIDE, SUN and TIME belong to all of us. Many important domain names will be lost, or worse, blocked before they can be registered."
Approval of the IRT Report is being rushed through ICANN with minimal opportunity to comment. It is vital that ICANN hear comment as soon as possible, and Monday is an opportunity to speak.
ICANN's Noncommercial Users Constituency will be hosting a breakfast at the Millennium Hotel on Monday morning. Please contact NCUC Co-Founder Kathy Kleiman, kathy@kathykleiman.com <mailto:kathy@kathykleiman.com>, for more details.
Registration to speak on 7/13 at this link (deadline 7/10): http://www.registration123.com/ICANN/GTLD/
IRT Report: http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-4-29may09-en.htm
IP Justice Comments: http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-final-report/msg00210.html
EFF Australia Comments: http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-final-report/msg00179.html
Noncommercial Users Constituency Website with comments: http://icann-ncuc.ning.com/