Bit that went out after NY and London
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/
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Seth Johnson < seth.johnson@realmeasures.dyndns.org> wrote:
In the following video you can see the response I got to the above questions:
This video has been removed due to terms of use violation.
Here are Kathy Kleiman's comments for the Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC):
This video has been removed due to terms of use violation. and the reason i think why all these two videos have been removed is that the account is suspended. the info on this can be found here http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=100382537644 Sorry to say the punkcast YouTube account is currently suspended. http://youtube.com/wwwhatsup As you may know it contains around 700 clips, mainly of the NYC music scene, but also of local internet related events including public hearings of the NYC Council's Committee on Technology in Government. It has had approaching 3 million views. YouTube has a policy of suspending accounts of repeat copyright offenders and I just got my 3rd strike. Almost laughably it was a DMCA takedown from Richard Hell over some footage I shot of him talking about his next record at a book signing a couple of weeks back. I plonked a mic in front of him and told him I was shooting for webcast, The clip was of conversation as I waited for him to start reading. He didn't say anything in particular beyond what went out in his recent press release about the record i.e. it's redubbed version of an old record that he wasn't happy with. I posted it with a link to his pr. Thought I was being helpful. I'd earlier posted a similar clip of him reading from his new book, and his co-author even posted it on his blog. http://kier-cs.blogspot.com/2009/07/book-launch-video.html http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=214457270320 I've filed a counter-notice and, if and when the account get's re-instated I'll remove the clip. I'd had two previous DMCA's recently, collateral damage in YouTube's ongoing war with Warner's and Viacom, both on song publishing. Hot Stuff - Von Iva - Warners Let's Make Love and Listen to Death From Above - Cansei der sei Sexy - Viacom I didn't contest these, altho I did have casual permission from the band who are the composers on the latter. On the second occasion YT made me check off that I understood copyright. In one other case where infringement was found through YouTube audio matching - a clip of K8 Hardy karaokeing Joan Armatrading - http://www.punkcast.com/1132/ - the record label allowed it to sit while they collected revenue from ads displayed on the page. I have, in the past, removed clips by request of musicians not happy with their performance as a matter of course. Normally they just contact me through YouTube and ask. I appreciate the irony of the DIY site punkcast being taken down by arguably the originator of punk style using entirely establishment means. Joly MacFie joly@punkcast.com 917 442 8665 -- Joe Baptista www.publicroot.org PublicRoot Consortium ---------------------------------------------------------------- The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, Representative & Accountable to the Internet community @large. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052) Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084 Personal: www.joebaptista.wordpress.com
Sucks, don't it? Joly indicates he's sent a counter-notice. Those videos are very useful as we approach these meetings in far-flung locales aroudn the globe. Seth -----Original Message----- From: Joe Baptista <baptista@publicroot.org> To: At-Large Worldwide <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 10:33:11 -0400 Subject: Re: [At-Large] Bit that went out after NY and London
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Seth Johnson < seth.johnson@realmeasures.dyndns.org> wrote:
In the following video you can see the response I got to the above questions:
This video has been removed due to terms of use violation.
Here are Kathy Kleiman's comments for the Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC):
This video has been removed due to terms of use violation.
and the reason i think why all these two videos have been removed is that the account is suspended. the info on this can be found here
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=100382537644
Sorry to say the punkcast YouTube account is currently suspended. http://youtube.com/wwwhatsup
As you may know it contains around 700 clips, mainly of the NYC music scene, but also of local internet related events including public hearings of the NYC Council's Committee on Technology in Government. It has had approaching 3 million views.
YouTube has a policy of suspending accounts of repeat copyright offenders and I just got my 3rd strike.
Almost laughably it was a DMCA takedown from Richard Hell over some footage I shot of him talking about his next record at a book signing a couple of weeks back. I plonked a mic in front of him and told him I was shooting for webcast, The clip was of conversation as I waited for him to start reading. He didn't say anything in particular beyond what went out in his recent press release about the record i.e. it's redubbed version of an old record that he wasn't happy with. I posted it with a link to his pr. Thought I was being helpful. I'd earlier posted a similar clip of him reading from his new book, and his co-author even posted it on his blog. http://kier-cs.blogspot.com/2009/07/book-launch-video.html http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=214457270320
I've filed a counter-notice and, if and when the account get's re-instated I'll remove the clip.
I'd had two previous DMCA's recently, collateral damage in YouTube's ongoing war with Warner's and Viacom, both on song publishing. Hot Stuff - Von Iva - Warners Let's Make Love and Listen to Death From Above - Cansei der sei Sexy - Viacom I didn't contest these, altho I did have casual permission from the band who are the composers on the latter.
On the second occasion YT made me check off that I understood copyright.
In one other case where infringement was found through YouTube audio matching - a clip of K8 Hardy karaokeing Joan Armatrading - http://www.punkcast.com/1132/ - the record label allowed it to sit while they collected revenue from ads displayed on the page.
I have, in the past, removed clips by request of musicians not happy with their performance as a matter of course. Normally they just contact me through YouTube and ask.
I appreciate the irony of the DIY site punkcast being taken down by arguably the originator of punk style using entirely establishment means.
Joly MacFie joly@punkcast.com 917 442 8665
-- Joe Baptista
www.publicroot.org PublicRoot Consortium ---------------------------------------------------------------- The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, Representative & Accountable to the Internet community @large. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052) Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084
Personal: www.joebaptista.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-list s.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
I've just received a grovelling apology from the perp of the DMCA notice - but reinstatement can take up to two weeks. I'll get the clips up on my own site later today. joly On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Seth Johnson < seth.johnson@realmeasures.dyndns.org> wrote:
Sucks, don't it? Joly indicates he's sent a counter-notice. Those videos are very useful as we approach these meetings in far-flung locales aroudn the globe.
Seth
-----Original Message----- From: Joe Baptista <baptista@publicroot.org> To: At-Large Worldwide <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 10:33:11 -0400 Subject: Re: [At-Large] Bit that went out after NY and London
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Seth Johnson < seth.johnson@realmeasures.dyndns.org> wrote:
In the following video you can see the response I got to the above questions:
This video has been removed due to terms of use violation.
Here are Kathy Kleiman's comments for the Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC):
This video has been removed due to terms of use violation.
and the reason i think why all these two videos have been removed is that the account is suspended. the info on this can be found here
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=100382537644
Sorry to say the punkcast YouTube account is currently suspended. http://youtube.com/wwwhatsup
As you may know it contains around 700 clips, mainly of the NYC music scene, but also of local internet related events including public hearings of the NYC Council's Committee on Technology in Government. It has had approaching 3 million views.
YouTube has a policy of suspending accounts of repeat copyright offenders and I just got my 3rd strike.
Almost laughably it was a DMCA takedown from Richard Hell over some footage I shot of him talking about his next record at a book signing a couple of weeks back. I plonked a mic in front of him and told him I was shooting for webcast, The clip was of conversation as I waited for him to start reading. He didn't say anything in particular beyond what went out in his recent press release about the record i.e. it's redubbed version of an old record that he wasn't happy with. I posted it with a link to his pr. Thought I was being helpful. I'd earlier posted a similar clip of him reading from his new book, and his co-author even posted it on his blog. http://kier-cs.blogspot.com/2009/07/book-launch-video.html http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=214457270320
I've filed a counter-notice and, if and when the account get's re-instated I'll remove the clip.
I'd had two previous DMCA's recently, collateral damage in YouTube's ongoing war with Warner's and Viacom, both on song publishing. Hot Stuff - Von Iva - Warners Let's Make Love and Listen to Death From Above - Cansei der sei Sexy - Viacom I didn't contest these, altho I did have casual permission from the band who are the composers on the latter.
On the second occasion YT made me check off that I understood copyright.
In one other case where infringement was found through YouTube audio matching - a clip of K8 Hardy karaokeing Joan Armatrading - http://www.punkcast.com/1132/ - the record label allowed it to sit while they collected revenue from ads displayed on the page.
I have, in the past, removed clips by request of musicians not happy with their performance as a matter of course. Normally they just contact me through YouTube and ask.
I appreciate the irony of the DIY site punkcast being taken down by arguably the originator of punk style using entirely establishment means.
Joly MacFie joly@punkcast.com 917 442 8665
-- Joe Baptista
www.publicroot.org PublicRoot Consortium ---------------------------------------------------------------- The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, Representative & Accountable to the Internet community @large. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052) Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084
Personal: www.joebaptista.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-list s.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
-- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 917 442 8665 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com ---------------------------------------------------------------
Bravo! The Youtube videos are now restored. Reposting my original notice below . . . Seth 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/
participants (3)
-
Joe Baptista -
Joly MacFie -
Seth Johnson