Jen, you didn't address the question to me, but perhaps I can give my views on your questions below. At 09/11/2012 10:36 AM, Jen Wolfe wrote:
Hi Jeff & Volker,
I apologize if I am asking an overly simplistic question as one of the new GNSO Council members, but isn't the purpose of this motion and PDP to ensure that internet users are not misdirected when looking for the one true Red Cross or IOC?
Not really. The Drafting Team could not come to closure of wether the names should be permanently reserved (perhaps to protect users, perhaps to save the parties money in reserving or registering the names so that others could not get them). That question will be dealt with under the PDP that has just started. This motion protects them until the PDP is complete, so that IF the PDP recommends long-term protection, the names will not have been registered (or protected under TLD-specific rules) in the interim.
If I am reading the motion correctly, the intention is to reserve only exact matches. How is Olympic paints impacted negatively by this reservation?
Well, currently Olympic Paints uses olympic.com. The IOC or national olympic committees seems to have control over that name in most of the other common TLDs. With the temporary reservation, Olympic Paints could not register olympic.home, olympic.build or olympoic.repair (and many others).
They chose their brand knowing there is a one true IOC and, most likely, intended to leverage the goodwill associated with the Olympic name.
Not sure we can attribute motive, but given that in their logo, the I is a paintbrush clearly resembling an olympic torch, the linkage has not escaped them.
It would seem it is in the interest of the greater internet community to protect the IOC and Red Cross versus brand owners in terms of reservations of rights.
That indeed is one of the main questions. Since protection close to a reserved name might also be available through the various launch processes, a related rationale is to save these organization from the cost and work required to take advantage of such protections. And in the larger picture who else needs or deserves such protection over and above that given to traditional trademarks.
But again, I'm new to the council, so I apologize if I am missing any history here that has already addressed this issue.
Sometimes a fresh review can be very useful for all! Alan
With kindest regards,
Jennifer