I know this is a fun thread, but perhaps we should make sure that all participants know what we are talking about. It is not any prohibition on registering IGO acronyms. That was rejected long ago. It is a proposal (among others) to put some acronyms in the Trademark clearing house so that if someone tries to register one of the "protected" acronyms, the IGO is notified and can try to ensure that the string is not used to mis-represent them. The concern is that even though (in my opinion) the proposal is reasonable, there is no way to easy way to implement it given the current GNSO-Board procedures. Thomas did not threaten to have the GAC leave. He said that if governments are dissatisfied with ICANN, they may look for other options. That is a fact - WTSA Resolution 47 demonstrates it. Alan
Lest we get distracted by process as ICANN does so often and so well, let's also remember the substance of the issue. Multiple people on this thread have complained "why should we afford protection to the XXX if we don't give it to someone else deserving?" or "why should ICANN give protection to XXX that it doesn't get elsewhere?"