- Gnso-igo-ingo - lists.icann.org

Follow-up to certain points raised during the 17 August call of the reconvened Working Group on Red Cross Red Crescent protections / ConfCall tomorrow Thursday
by Stephane Hankins Sept. 6, 2017

Sept. 6, 2017

Dear Thomas, Dear members of the reconvened WG group, (1) I am not sure the agreement was that we would submit a renewed outline of the legal protections of the designations (words, names). We may refer you to our full report submitted to the Board in 2013 and which was circulated to the Group recently. We are also attaching a new brief outlining the provisions included in a chosen list of national laws confirming i) the right/entitlement of the National Red Cross or Red Crescent Society in the given country to make use of the designations (words, names); ii) the protections accorded to the designations (words, names) under domestic law and the penal sanctions applicable to misuse thereof. Our records suggest that national legislation on the use and the protection of the Red Cross and Red Crescent designations (words, names) exist in over 120 national jurisdictions. As rightfully noted by Chris in his message, in many countries (so-called monist jurisdictions), international treaties such as the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols of 1977 and 2005 are directly applicable in the domestic legal order of States parties, and thus, without the requirement, in principle, of national implementing legislation. (2) We appreciate that tomorrow’s reconvened working group session is the last discussion prior to the GNSO’s closed session, but wish to recommend that those lawyers within the GNSO Council take a closer look at the documents submitted. This should ensure an informed decision that is in line with the international legal protections accorded to the designations (words, names) and with the internationally defined uses of the same (including by the national and international components of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement for the purpose of identification). (3) As suggested at the end of the last call, we take this opportunity to lay out once more in writing a summary of the main points of the case for extending the current protections/reservations to the identifiers of the respective National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and for recommending that these protections be made permanent. We appreciate that this has been submitted many times before and please understand that we are not in a position to add new legal grounds to what should constitute an already solid case. The legal case 1) The designations (words, names) “Red Cross”, “Red Crescent”, “Red Lion and Sun” are protected under the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols of 1977. The designation (words, name) “Red Crystal” is on its part protected under the combined provisions of the 2005 Third Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions and Resolution 1 unanimously by the 29th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent in 2005 (and therefore by all States parties to the Geneva Conventions as members of the International Conference). States have an international obligation under these international treaties to ensure the protection of these designations (words, names) and to adopt, if their legislation is not already adequate, measures necessary for the repression, at all times, of abuses of the designations (words, names). There are 196 Parties to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the list thereof may be accessed on the website of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs – as it is the Swiss Federal Council which exercises the function of Depository of these international treaties. 2) There are two recognized uses of the distinctive emblems and of their designations (words, names): one is “protective use” in times of armed conflict, the other is “indicative use” to indicate a link with the International Movement of the Red Cross and Red Crescent and its respective components (the 190 recognized National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, the ICRC and the IFRC). The use by Red Cross or Red Crescent Societies is stipulated under Article 44 para. 1 to 3 of the first Geneva Convention of 1949. The Red Cross and Red Crescent organizations are hence recognized under international law (and the domestic legislation in force in a majority of countries) the legal right to make use of the designations (words, names). This is alternatively provided for under different types of national legislation (in a national legislation on the use and protection of the Red Cross and Red Crescent emblems, in a national legislation on the recognition/status of a National Society in the domestic legal order, etc.). National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies have an express duty under the Statutes of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement to make use of one of the names (and distinctive emblems) in conformity with the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols. This constitutes one of 10 Conditions for recognition of National Societies as a component of the Movement (Article 4 of the Statutes of the Movement). It is furthermore confirmed in the agreed practice of the Movement that, when used for indicative (identification) purposes as part of a National Society’s official name, the words require to be accompanied by an adjective indicating national affiliation (“British Red Cross Society”, “Croix-Rouge canadienne”, etc.). 3) In legal terms, the designations (words, names) require to be protected from misuse at all times. This implies that they be protected from misuse - in both their authorized uses and displays (including when used as part of the name of one of the Red Cross or Red Crescent organizations, including the National Societies); - whether displayed on their own or when used together with other words or designs. The protections would be meaningful if they did not extend to the use of the designations when used or displayed in combination with other words. Absent the possibility of a string similarity review mechanism as we are explained, and with a view to ensuring an effective protection of the designations in their indicative function, there is no other way but to extend the protections and reservations of the designations (words, names) in the domain name system to the names and identifiers of the respective Red Cross and Red Crescent organizations. The public policy case Besides the legal case outlined above and which should of itself ground the global public policy considerations for the protections, we have also in the past highlighted a range of additional considerations for the extension of the reservations to the full names of the Red Cross and Red Crescent organisations, in particular the National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. These include in particular to: - the distinct roles and mandates recognized to a National Society under international law and under domestic laws – thus including, the distinct and privileged status and responsibilities of National Societies as an auxiliary to the public authorities in the humanitarian field in their own country; - the particular risks of fraudulent use of the names and identifiers of National Societies (and of the Movement as a whole) which may occur, particularly in the event of a humanitarian emergency. We are attaching once again the intervention by Charlotte Lindsey, ICRC’s Director of Communication and Information Management, to the GNSO Council as presented on 14th April 2016, which provided elements to this question. Until tomorrow. With best regards, Stéphane Stéphane J. Hankins Legal adviser Cooperation and coordination within the Movement International Committee of the Red Cross Tel (direct line): ++0041 22 730 24 19 -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Rickert [mailto:thomas@rickert.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2017 12:37 PM To: Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org> Cc: Thomas Rickert <thomas(a)rickert.net>; Chuck <consult(a)cgomes.com>; christopher.lamb17(a)gmail.com; Jorge.Cancio(a)bakom.admin.ch; Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com>; gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org Subject: IMPORTANT: Are there more questions? Dear all, Thanks for this vivid exchange of e-mails. As we prepare for the upcoming call it would be great to understand whether there are open questions with respect to the legal basis for protections. If so, please send them to the list prior to the call so we can hopefully get answers for everyone’s consideration before or during the call. If there are no questions on the list, we have to assume there are none and that we can proceed to a mini consensus call on the aspect of the legal basis for protections. If there are questions, we hope to get them answered and move to the mini consensus call. An agenda for the call will be circulated shortly. Best, Thomas > Am 04.09.2017 um 01:18 schrieb Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org>: > > Dear Chuck and everyone, > > In addition to the information from Christopher, we understand that the Red Cross representatives may be preparing an updated list of the protections that the Red Cross names currently under discussion may be entitled to under various national laws. In the meantime, Working Group members may find helpful the initial research that ICANN Legal performed, as part of the work of the original PDP Working Group, relating to the protection of the terms associated with the Red Cross, International Olympic Committee and IGOs: see Annex 5 of the Final Report - https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/igo-ingo-final-10nov13-en.pdf (please note that the research was limited to answering a specific question that was posed at the time by the Working Group, as reflected in the introductory text to this Annex). > > Working Group members may also find helpful the current, interim list of reserved names of the Red Cross National Societies: https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/packages/reserved-names/ReservedN… . Please note that, as part of the current scope of work for this group, the GNSO Council has expressly requested that the group consider the specific names of the 190 Red Cross National Societies as well as a specific, limited set of variants of those names. As you may recall, the Red Cross representatives have kindly offered to work with ICANN and the Working Group to develop and agree on the final list of names and variants, if and when appropriate. > > Thanks and cheers > Mary =============================================================================== The ICRC - working to protect and assist people affected by armed conflict and other situations of violence. Find out more: www.icrc.org This e-mail is intended for the named recipient(s) only. Its contents are confidential and may only be retained by the named recipient (s) and may only be copied or disclosed with the consent of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). If you are not an intended recipient please delete this e-mail and notify the sender. ===============================================================================

1 0

Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo] IMPORTANT: Are there more questions?
by Chuck Sept. 5, 2017

Sept. 5, 2017

I asked my questions and received reasonably good answers. Chuck -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Rickert [mailto:thomas@rickert.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2017 12:37 PM To: Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org> Cc: Thomas Rickert <thomas(a)rickert.net>; Chuck <consult(a)cgomes.com>; christopher.lamb17(a)gmail.com; Jorge.Cancio(a)bakom.admin.ch; Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com>; gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org Subject: IMPORTANT: Are there more questions? Dear all, Thanks for this vivid exchange of e-mails. As we prepare for the upcoming call it would be great to understand whether there are open questions with respect to the legal basis for protections. If so, please send them to the list prior to the call so we can hopefully get answers for everyone’s consideration before or during the call. If there are no questions on the list, we have to assume there are none and that we can proceed to a mini consensus call on the aspect of the legal basis for protections. If there are questions, we hope to get them answered and move to the mini consensus call. An agenda for the call will be circulated shortly. Best, Thomas > Am 04.09.2017 um 01:18 schrieb Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org>: > > Dear Chuck and everyone, > > In addition to the information from Christopher, we understand that the Red Cross representatives may be preparing an updated list of the protections that the Red Cross names currently under discussion may be entitled to under various national laws. In the meantime, Working Group members may find helpful the initial research that ICANN Legal performed, as part of the work of the original PDP Working Group, relating to the protection of the terms associated with the Red Cross, International Olympic Committee and IGOs: see Annex 5 of the Final Report - https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/igo-ingo-final-10nov13-en.pdf (please note that the research was limited to answering a specific question that was posed at the time by the Working Group, as reflected in the introductory text to this Annex). > > Working Group members may also find helpful the current, interim list of reserved names of the Red Cross National Societies: https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/packages/reserved-names/ReservedN…. Please note that, as part of the current scope of work for this group, the GNSO Council has expressly requested that the group consider the specific names of the 190 Red Cross National Societies as well as a specific, limited set of variants of those names. As you may recall, the Red Cross representatives have kindly offered to work with ICANN and the Working Group to develop and agree on the final list of names and variants, if and when appropriate. > > Thanks and cheers > Mary > > On 9/3/17, 10:19, "gnso-igo-ingo-bounces(a)icann.org on behalf of Chuck" <gnso-igo-ingo-bounces(a)icann.org on behalf of consult(a)cgomes.com> wrote: > > Thanks Chris. > > Chuck > > -----Original Message----- > From: christopher.lamb17(a)gmail.com [mailto:christopher.lamb17@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2017 1:47 AM > To: Chuck <consult(a)cgomes.com>; Jorge.Cancio(a)bakom.admin.ch; > gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com > Cc: gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org > Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo] FOR INFORMATION: Notes on certain > pointsraisedduring the 17 August call of the reconvened WorkingGroup onRed > Cross protections > > Dear Chuck, > > On the words and national names: Yes, with a very few exceptions. > > To your other question about other jurisdictions, also Yes although some > have also expanded the language to incorporate the Red Crystal adopted from > the 2005 Third Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions. Please note > though that some jurisdictions and legal systems don't require domestic > legislation because the treaty language automatically becomes part of > domestic law by virtue of becoming a party to the treaty. > > Chris > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chuck > Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2017 09:51 > To: Jorge.Cancio(a)bakom.admin.ch ; gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com > Cc: gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org > Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo] FOR INFORMATION: Notes on certain > pointsraisedduring the 17 August call of the reconvened WorkingGroup onRed > Cross protections > > Do all of the national names under consideration contain the words > themselves? > > Chuck > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jorge.Cancio(a)bakom.admin.ch [mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch] > Sent: Friday, August 25, 2017 1:02 PM > To: consult(a)cgomes.com; gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com > Cc: gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org > Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo] FOR INFORMATION: Notes on certain points > raisedduring the 17 August call of the reconvened Working Group onRed Cross > protections > > Sorry for coming back again, but on page 3 of the ICRC Memo, footnote 2, > article 44 of the first Geneva Convention is quoted wherein the protection > of the "words" themselves is warranted: > > > > 2 The first Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the > Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field of 12 August 1949 provides > equal protection to the emblems of the red cross, red crescent and red lion > and sun. Article 44 provides that "[...] the emblem of the red cross on a > white ground and the words "Red Cross, or "Geneva Cross" may not be > employed, either in time of peace or in time of war, except to indicate or > to protect the medical units and establishments, the personnel and material > protected by the present Convention and other Conventions dealing with > similar matters. The same shall apply to the other emblems mentioned in > Article 38, paragraph 2, in respect of the countries that use them [the red > crescent, the red lion and sun]". > > Best > > Jorge > > > ________________________________ > > Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com> > Datum: 25. August 2017 um 20:47:37 MESZ > An: Chuck <consult(a)cgomes.com> > Cc: gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org <gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org> > Betreff: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo] FOR INFORMATION: Notes on certain points > raisedduring the 17 August call of the reconvened Working Group onRed Cross > protections > > I believe some have argued that the term "designation" refers to the names > "Red Cross", etc. > > However it is significant that Art. 53 of the first Geneva Convention, > quoted by Christopher, refers to "the emblem or the designation " Red Cross > " or " Geneva Cross "." After some research, it appears fairly clear that > "Geneva Cross" is another name for the "red cross on a white ground" symbol, > and is NOT used as a name or words referring to the Red Cross organizations. > In other words, there is no Geneva Cross name. > > Thus, it seems to make sense that both "emblem" and "designation" refer to > the symbols and not to the words. This is consistent with Christopher's > explanation as well. > > Greg > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Chuck > <consult(a)cgomes.com<mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> wrote: > Thanks very much Chris. Am I correct then in concluding that 'designation' > is just another form of the emblem (i.e., symbol)? Is there no language in > any of the treaties or laws that mentions the organization names? If so, on > what legal basis can we use for protecting the names? > > Note that I am not opposed to protecting the names but am just trying to > find a legal basis if there is one. > > Chuck > > From: christopher.lamb17(a)gmail.com<mailto:christopher.lamb17@gmail.com> > [mailto:christopher.lamb17@gmail.com<mailto:christopher.lamb17@gmail.com>] > Sent: Friday, August 25, 2017 9:11 AM > To: Chuck <consult(a)cgomes.com<mailto:consult@cgomes.com>>; 'Mary Wong' > <mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>>; > gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org> > > Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo] FOR INFORMATION: Notes on certain points > raisedduring the 17 August call of the reconvened Working Group onRed Cross > protections > > Dear Chuck, > > The terms you mention are, for the purposes of the Geneva Conventions, > explained in the first and third paragraphs of Article 53 of the First > Geneva Convention 1949, as follows: > > "Art. 53. The use by individuals, societies, firms or companies either > public or private, other than those entitled thereto under the present > Convention, of the emblem or the designation " Red Cross " or " Geneva Cross > " or any sign or designation constituting an imitation thereof, whatever the > object of such use, and irrespective of the date of its adoption, shall be > prohibited at all times. > ... > > Nevertheless, such High Contracting Parties as were not party to the Geneva > Convention of 27 July 1929, may grant to prior users of the emblems, > designations, signs or marks designated in the first paragraph, a time limit > not to exceed three years from the coming into force of the present > Convention to discontinue such use provided that the said use shall not be > such as would appear, in time of war, to confer the protection of the > Convention." > > So, the designation is the formal name of the emblem, provided for it by the > treaty. I hope this helps. > > Chris > > > From: Chuck > Sent: Friday, August 25, 2017 23:21 > To: 'Mary Wong' ; gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo] FOR INFORMATION: Notes on certain points > raisedduring the 17 August call of the reconvened Working Group onRed Cross > protections > > Thanks Mary. I have some questions for the legal experts, especially those > familiar with terminology used in international treaties. > > The following terminology is used repeatedly in the applicable laws: > "distinctive emblems and their designations". I understand 'emblems' to > mean the actual symbols but what do 'designations' mean? In other words, > what is a designation of one of the emblems? One thing that is confusing to > me is that all the laws/treaties clearly protect the emblems. How do they > apply to the names themselves? > > Chuck > > > From: > gnso-igo-ingo-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-bounces@icann.org> > [mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 2:52 PM > To: gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org> > Subject: [Gnso-igo-ingo] FOR INFORMATION: Notes on certain points raised > during the 17 August call of the reconvened Working Group on Red Cross > protections > > Dear all, > > Following from the call last Thursday (17 August), staff has attempted to > put together a summary of the major questions and points (including the > relevant text of the Geneva Conventions cited) that were raised on the call. > The summary is attached. If you wish to provide comments or raise further > questions, please do so directly in the identical Google Doc version here: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume… > JAc/edit?usp=sharing. > > Please note that the summary was intentionally kept as brief as possible, so > it does not go into detail about the international law basis. This is > further explored in the submissions that were provided by the Red Cross > representatives, and in Annex A of the Briefing Document prepared for the > facilitated discussions that took place at ICANN58 in March this year > (please refer to the wiki page for this Working Group here for the links: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_… ). > > We hope the summary is helpful to your further deliberations. > > Thanks and cheers > Mary > > From: > <gnso-igo-ingo-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-bounces@icann.org>> on > behalf of Julie Bisland > <julie.bisland(a)icann.org<mailto:julie.bisland@icann.org>> > Date: Thursday, August 17, 2017 at 12:06 > To: "gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org>" > <gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org>> > Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>" > <gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>> > Subject: [Gnso-igo-ingo] Recordings, Attendance & AC Chat for IGO-INGO > Protections in all gTLDS PDP WG on Red Cross Names on 17 August 2017 at > 13:00 UTC > > > Dear all, > > > > Please find the attendance attached, and the mp3, Adobe Connect recording > and AC Chat below for the reconvened IGO-INGO Protections in all gTLDs PDP > Working Group on Red Cross Names held on Thursday, 17 August 2017 at 13:00 > UTC. > > > > Mp3: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__audio.icann.org_gnso_gn… > > > AC recording: > https://participate.icann.org/p59acngik1a/<https://participate.icann.org/p59acngik1a/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=92ef84797cbc0a40…> > > > The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master > Calendar page: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group… <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group…> > > > > Mailing list archive: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo/ > > > > Agenda Wiki page: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_… <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_…> > > > > ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** > > > > Thank you. > > Kind regards, > > > > Julie > > --------------- > > > > Adobe Connect chat transcript for 17 August 2017 > > Julie Bisland:Welcome to the Reconvened IGO INGO PDP Working Group call on > Red Cross Names on Thursday, 17 August 2017 at 13:00 UTC. > > Julie Bisland:Agenda wiki page: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_- > 2Dg8hB&d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=QiF-05YzARos > RvTYd84AB_UYInlydmFcjNmBM5XgySw&m=k1wo94sSUbWaoqtfbcQCj5rK4YOaypeUgXO53UhSvC > k&s=I_16BY_qfDXIQ9fNax5rRL2xH8tGd-iAP7ADs611zJI&e= > > Julie Bisland:looking for the beeping > > Heather Forrest:Beeping noise? > > Julie Bisland:Welcome Ken Stubbs :) > > Julie Bisland:Welcome Giacomo Mazzone > > ken stubbs:who is speaking ? > > Heather Forrest:It's not clear to me how protection of "Red Cross", etc > and symbols covers the national society names > > ken stubbs:i have a question after ther speakers comments are over. > > Thomas Rickert, WG Chair:Noted, Ken! > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):Thanks to Stephane for the explanations! > > Greg Shatan:I second Heather's question. > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):Apart from change in the law, there is also > the possibility that the PDP WG was not fully aware of the legal basis - as > Thomas is hinting, I feel > > Heather Forrest:So back to my earlier chat comment - it's not clear to me > how the national society names fit here in the Geneva Convention > > Greg Shatan:We are still not "fully aware" of the legal basis, if any, for > this request. > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I feel that Stephane has explained it quite > well... > > Greg Shatan:no, sorry, he talked around the specific issue, hence the > question. > > Chuck Gomes:My understanding is that staff was going to provide the WG > with the legal basis for the national society names. Is that correct? If > not, I think that would be a good action item before our next meeting. > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):As Stephane apparently is not on the adobe > maybe the question could be read aloud and/or circulated in writing > > Mary Wong:@Chuck, by circulating the Red Cross' position paper and the > Briefing Document that was used in Copenhagen (which was prepared by staff > and Bruce Tonkin), this group can fully discusss that question. We didn't > feel it's our place (as staff) to draw legal conclusions specifically. > > Chuck Gomes:@ Mary: You don't need to draw legal conclusions but you could > summarize the legal basis for protection of the national names. > > ken stubbs:your talking over each other > > Mary Wong:@Chuck, understood - but note that the Geneva Conventions and > the Protocols do not specifically mention the National Society names, or > what specific names associaed with the Red Cross are intended by use of the > terms "emblem" and "designations" therein. Hence, we felt it was for the WG > - with the assistance of the RC reps - to clarify what, exactly, is the > scope of the law as a result (especially in the DNS). > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Mary: could you circulate the conclusions > of the facilitated dialogue of Copenhagen as well as the relevant Board > Resolution? thanks > > Mary Wong:@Jorge, of course - hang on just a moment. > > Thomas Rickert, WG Chair:The use by individuals, societies, firms or > companies either public or private, other than those entitled thereto under > the present Convention, of the emblem or the designation "Red Cross" or > "Geneva Cross", or any sign or designation constituting an imitation > thereof, whatever the object of such use, and irrespective of the date of > its adoption, shall be prohibited at all times.By reason of the tribute paid > to Switzerland by the adoption of the reversed Federal colours, and of the > confusion which may arise between the arms of Switzerland and the > distinctive emblem of the Convention, the use by private individuals, > societies or firms, of the arms of the Swiss Confederation, or of marks > constituting an imitation thereof, whether as trademarks or commercial > marks, or as parts of such marks, or for a purpose contrary to commercial > honesty, or in circumstances capable of wounding Swiss national sentiment, > shall be prohibited at all times.Nevertheless, such High Contracting Parties > as were not party to the Geneva > > Thomas Rickert, WG Chair:That is the part of the Geneva Convention that in > my view is relevant for this. > > giacomo mazzone:Jorge you mean this: (2) Review of briefing paper from > Copenhagen facilitated discussion > (http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo/2017-July/000046.html) > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I meant the conclusions drwan by Bruce > Tonkin from the facilitated discussion > > Heather Forrest:+1 Greg - it seems to me that the lack of clarity on legal > basis is exactly why we're here now (to answer Ken's question that started > this discussion) > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):the Board Resolution is here: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resources > _board-2Dmaterial_resolutions-2D2017-2D03-2D16-2Den-232.e.i&d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u > 3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=QiF-05YzARosRvTYd84AB_UYInlydmFcjNm > BM5XgySw&m=k1wo94sSUbWaoqtfbcQCj5rK4YOaypeUgXO53UhSvCk&s=rKKnEHJ1PqpyngYHDII > thQ4ae8EPxlaAFXESSak4X7o&e= > > Thomas Rickert, WG Chair:What I pasted here is Article 53 > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):Both the Board Resolution and the > conclusions of the facilitated discussion highlighted both the legal basis > and the public policy considerations > > Greg Shatan:We don't need an explicit reference to domain names to find a > legal basis. > > Greg Shatan:I thought we were looking at "rights protections." If we are > not talking about legal rights, what kind of rights are we talking about? > > Alan Greenberg:We (ICANN and the GNSO) have sufficuent major issues to > look at that we need to get this done quickly and move on. > > Greg Shatan:Jorge, can you provide more specific citations, please. > > Greg Shatan:Alan, I agree with the concern regarding bandwidth. You and I > are in many of the same groups. But that doesn't support any particular > conclusion. > > Greg Shatan:One could conclude that it takes many pages of verbiage, > because there is no clear and succinct statement that can be made to show a > basis for the claimed right for which protections are being requested. > > Mary Wong:@Jorge, the links to the Board resolution (which you also > posted, thanks) and the GNSO Council resolution have been pasted in the > Notes pod. Bruce's high level summary was in an email to the IGO-RC > discussion group, dated 13 March: > http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/discussion-igo-rc/2017-March/000108.html > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Greg: I hope Mary may find the > conclusion/summary of the facilitated dialogue. As for the Board Resolution > this part is relevant: "(3) In considering the Board's request, the Council > is requested to duly take into account these factors and the public policy > advice to reserve the finite list of names of the Red Cross and Red Crescent > National Societies, as recognized within the International Red Cross and Red > Crescent Movement, in all gTLDs." > > Heather Forrest:+1 Chuck - basis in law had significant impacts on the > recommendations of the Reserved Names WG in 2007 > > Greg Shatan:Jorge, what "factors" is the quoted language referring to? The > quoted language provides no support for any particular conclusions. > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Mary: I feel you found the summary about > IGOs - not the one on ICRC > > Mary Wong:@Chuck, @Thomas, I've pasted the factors that the discussion > group, Board and Council considered in the Notes pod. > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):"factors" refers I guess to the preceding > parts of the Resolution, where legal basis and GAC Advice etc. are mentioned > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):sorry no sound > > Greg Shatan:Then I guess that is what we should be looking at, to see what > they've said about legal basis. > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):audio problems, sorry! > > Julie Bisland:would you like our operator to dial out to you? > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I'm ready I think > > Julie Bisland:yes, I see you have your speaker on now. Excellent! > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):the Board Resolution mentions the following > public policy arguments included in GAC Advice: "and the global public > policy considerations in the protections of the identifiers of the > respective Red Cross and Red Crescent organizations from forms of misuse in > the domain name system, including from fraud and embezzlement in times of > humanitarian crises." > > Greg Shatan:Public policy is not a legal basis. > > Mary Wong:@Jorge, my apologies (re the wrong message from Bruce). I cannot > at the moment find a summary of the Red Cross discussion but will resume > looking after this call. > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Mary: maybe the summary took the form of > the proposed Board language? > > Greg Shatan:Where does the Geneva Convention mention the names of the > national societies? (Not individually but as a class of "strings"). > > Mary Wong:@Greg, I believe there is mention in Article 44. > > Chuck Gomes:Am I the only one that would like us to use a systematic > approach to deliberate on the questions we are tasked with answering? We > seem to continue to talk about all questions together, which in my opinion > makes it difficult to make progress. Why not focus on one charter question > at a time, discuss whether the three Council criteria are satisfied and if > not discuss whether there is a reasoable basis for making an exception? > > Alan Greenberg:Red Cross fraud is a bad thing, but protecting the country > names will d onothing to protect against such fraud. We cannot stop similar > names from being registered and we cannot protect against words such as > tsumani or flod. SO let's not confuse the rationale. > > Greg Shatan:Chuck, I think that would be a very helpful and appropriate > approach. > > Mary Wong:@Chuck, @Greg, our (staff) assumption was that the group is > already on the question of "what is the reasonable basis" (e.g. law and/or > public policy), as the Council's (and Board's) list of factors/criteria have > already defined the scope for the group. > > Chuck Gomes:On which charter question Mary? > > Greg Shatan:I'm not asking for perfection. Just a reasonable and > objective legal basis. > > Mary Wong:@Chuck, on the specific request to possibly amend the PDP > recommendation concerning the names of the Red Cross National Societies and > the two International Movement names., plus a limited, defined set of > variants. > > Chuck Gomes:What charter question are we discussing now? > > Greg Shatan:Mary, where in Article 44? I'm looking at Art 44 and not > seeing it. > > Mary Wong:@Chuck, all - the charter (scope) for this group was outlined in > the Council resolution i.e. amend the original PDP recomemndation regarding > the national society names, the two international movement names, and the > agreed limited variant list. > > Greg Shatan:Art 44 is entitled "Combatants and prisoners of war." > > giacomo mazzone:I agree with what Jorge just said. it's a matter of public > policy mainly (legal aspects are important but are a plus). aim of the group > is to identify what's the best way to ensure this protection with the > minimum of hurdles. > > Mary Wong:@Greg, it is Article 44 of the First Geneva Convention 1949, I > believe. > > Mary > Wong:https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Article.xsp?action=op > enDocument&documentId=5CCB6DD2AB618FABC12563CD0051A251 > > Jennifer Breckenridge:GC Convention 1- ARTICLE 44 With the exception of > the cases mentioned in the following paragraphs of the present Article, the > emblem of the Red Cross on a white ground and the words "Red Cross", or > "Geneva Cross" may not be employed, either in time of peace or in time of > war, except to indicate or to protect the medical units and establishments, > the personnel and material protected by the present Convention and other > Conventions dealing with similar matters. The same shall apply to the > emblems mentioned in Article 38, second paragraph [ Link ] , in respect of > the countries which use them. The National Red Cross Societies and other > Societies designated in Article 26 [ Link ] shall have the right to use the > distinctive emblem conferring the protection of the Convention only within > the framework of the present paragraph. Furthermore, National Red Cross (Red > Crescent, Red Lion and Sun) Societies may, in time of peace, in accordance > with their national legislation, make use of the name and emblem of the Red > Cros > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I feel the document really is clear enough, > when the purpose is to understand > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):question tp Greg: have you read the > 44-pager? > > Chuck Gomes:The language is not at all clear to me. > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Chuck: of course, it is legal language > > Jennifer Breckenridge:continued.....for their other activities which are > in conformity with the principles laid down by the International Red Cross > Conferences. When those activities are carried out in time of war, the > conditions for the use of the emblem shall be such that it cannot be > considered as conferring the protection of the Convention; the emblem shall > be comparatively small in size and may not be placed on armlets or on the > roofs of buildings.The international Red Cross organizations and their duly > authorized personnel shall be permitted to make use, at all times, of the > emblem of the Red Cross on a white ground.As an exceptional measure, in > conformity with national legislation and with the express permission of one > of the National Red Cross (Red Crescent, Red Lion and Sun) Societies, the > emblem of the Convention may be employed in time of peace to identify > vehicles used as ambulances and to mark the position of aid stations > exclusively assigned to the purpose of giving free treatment to the wounded > or sick. > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I feel the burden is on who is making > questions and to refer to the 44-doc > > Mary Wong:All, will it help for staff to recirculate the provisions that > Jennifer and Stephane cited/quoted, as well as Jennifer's statement on thsi > call? > > Greg Shatan:The burden of proof is always on those trying to prove > something. > > Chuck Gomes:Legal language can be clear and often is. This legal language > is not. The explanations given may be valid but without them I never would > have concluded that the national names need to be protected. All that seems > clear is that they can use the emblems. > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):well, they have in my view... with 44 > pages... > > Greg Shatan:Your view is not in doubt, Jorge. > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):when you make such an effort, the minimum > is to be specific in the follow-up questions > > Greg Shatan:A for Effort, perhaps, but not an A for clarity. > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I was a bit unsure about whether all had > read it, as comments were being made to a completely unrelated provision of > the Conventions... > > Greg Shatan:Having heard what has been said here, one can now form some > more specific questions. > > Greg Shatan:Jorge, blame Google for pulling up the wrong Geneva Convention > Art. 44. > > Jennifer Breckenridge:sorry its long and keeps cutting off the end of the > clause... > > Mary Wong:@Jennifer, I put the link to the specific Article in the chat > above. This entire chat will also be saved and circulatd to the list. > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Greg: I'll agree on that ;P > > Greg Shatan:If we can avoid 1300-1400 UTC we can avoid overlap with CCWG. > > giacomo mazzone:who shall prepare the summary requested for point 2 ? it > was not clear tome ... > > Julie Bisland:I'll send out an email invite shortly, for 7 September 2017 > at 14 :00 UTC > > Mary Wong:@Giacomo, staff will work with Thomas to follow up on the > requests made on this call. > > Heather Forrest:just noting that 1400 utc is 00:00 for parts of APAC > > giacomo mazzone:thank Mary, could you circulate in advance to avoid that > discussion endless will go on during the call > > Mary Wong:@Giacomo, yes, we will circulate to the list. > > Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):thanks Thomas, all and regards > > > ________________________________ > _______________________________________________ > Gnso-igo-ingo mailing list > Gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo > > ________________________________ > [Avast logo]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_antiviru… > > > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > www.avast.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_antiviru… > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gnso-igo-ingo mailing list > Gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo > > > _______________________________________________ > Gnso-igo-ingo mailing list > Gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo > > > _______________________________________________ > Gnso-igo-ingo mailing list > Gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo > > > _______________________________________________ > Gnso-igo-ingo mailing list > Gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo

1 0

FOR INFORMATION: Notes on certain points raised during the 17 August call of the reconvened Working Group on Red Cross protections
by Mary Wong Sept. 3, 2017

Sept. 3, 2017

Dear all, Following from the call last Thursday (17 August), staff has attempted to put together a summary of the major questions and points (including the relevant text of the Geneva Conventions cited) that were raised on the call. The summary is attached. If you wish to provide comments or raise further questions, please do so directly in the identical Google Doc version here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VftetlaXmEW1HqNVv3EYQi4x2VtKX6eja0VBizM…. Please note that the summary was intentionally kept as brief as possible, so it does not go into detail about the international law basis. This is further explored in the submissions that were provided by the Red Cross representatives, and in Annex A of the Briefing Document prepared for the facilitated discussions that took place at ICANN58 in March this year (please refer to the wiki page for this Working Group here for the links: https://community.icann.org/x/-g8hB) We hope the summary is helpful to your further deliberations. Thanks and cheers Mary From: <gnso-igo-ingo-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Julie Bisland <julie.bisland(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, August 17, 2017 at 12:06 To: "gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org" <gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-igo-ingo] Recordings, Attendance & AC Chat for IGO-INGO Protections in all gTLDS PDP WG on Red Cross Names on 17 August 2017 at 13:00 UTC Dear all, Please find the attendance attached, and the mp3, Adobe Connect recording and AC Chat below for the reconvened IGO-INGO Protections in all gTLDs PDP Working Group on Red Cross Names held on Thursday, 17 August 2017 at 13:00 UTC. Mp3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-17aug17-en.mp3< http:/audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-17aug17-en.mp3%0d> AC recording: https://participate.icann.org/p59acngik1a/<https://participate.icann.org/p59acngik1a/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=92ef84797cbc0a40…> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar[gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group…> Mailing list archive: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo/ Agenda Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/-g8hB[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_…> ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Thank you. Kind regards, Julie ——————————————— Adobe Connect chat transcript for 17 August 2017 Julie Bisland:Welcome to the Reconvened IGO INGO PDP Working Group call on Red Cross Names on Thursday, 17 August 2017 at 13:00 UTC. Julie Bisland:Agenda wiki page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_… Julie Bisland:looking for the beeping Heather Forrest:Beeping noise? Julie Bisland:Welcome Ken Stubbs :) Julie Bisland:Welcome Giacomo Mazzone ken stubbs:who is speaking ? Heather Forrest:It's not clear to me how protection of "Red Cross", etc and symbols covers the national society names ken stubbs:i have a question after ther speakers comments are over. Thomas Rickert, WG Chair:Noted, Ken! Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):Thanks to Stephane for the explanations! Greg Shatan:I second Heather's question. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):Apart from change in the law, there is also the possibility that the PDP WG was not fully aware of the legal basis - as Thomas is hinting, I feel Heather Forrest:So back to my earlier chat comment - it's not clear to me how the national society names fit here in the Geneva Convention Greg Shatan:We are still not "fully aware" of the legal basis, if any, for this request. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I feel that Stephane has explained it quite well... Greg Shatan:no, sorry, he talked around the specific issue, hence the question. Chuck Gomes:My understanding is that staff was going to provide the WG with the legal basis for the national society names. Is that correct? If not, I think that would be a good action item before our next meeting. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):As Stephane apparently is not on the adobe maybe the question could be read aloud and/or circulated in writing Mary Wong:@Chuck, by circulating the Red Cross' position paper and the Briefing Document that was used in Copenhagen (which was prepared by staff and Bruce Tonkin), this group can fully discusss that question. We didn't feel it's our place (as staff) to draw legal conclusions specifically. Chuck Gomes:@ Mary: You don't need to draw legal conclusions but you could summarize the legal basis for protection of the national names. ken stubbs:your talking over each other Mary Wong:@Chuck, understood - but note that the Geneva Conventions and the Protocols do not specifically mention the National Society names, or what specific names associaed with the Red Cross are intended by use of the terms "emblem" and "designations" therein. Hence, we felt it was for the WG - with the assistance of the RC reps - to clarify what, exactly, is the scope of the law as a result (especially in the DNS). Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Mary: could you circulate the conclusions of the facilitated dialogue of Copenhagen as well as the relevant Board Resolution? thanks Mary Wong:@Jorge, of course - hang on just a moment. Thomas Rickert, WG Chair:The use by individuals, societies, firms or companies either public or private, other than those entitled thereto under the present Convention, of the emblem or the designation "Red Cross" or "Geneva Cross", or any sign or designation constituting an imitation thereof, whatever the object of such use, and irrespective of the date of its adoption, shall be prohibited at all times.By reason of the tribute paid to Switzerland by the adoption of the reversed Federal colours, and of the confusion which may arise between the arms of Switzerland and the distinctive emblem of the Convention, the use by private individuals, societies or firms, of the arms of the Swiss Confederation, or of marks constituting an imitation thereof, whether as trademarks or commercial marks, or as parts of such marks, or for a purpose contrary to commercial honesty, or in circumstances capable of wounding Swiss national sentiment, shall be prohibited at all times.Nevertheless, such High Contracting Parties as were not party to the Geneva Thomas Rickert, WG Chair:That is the part of the Geneva Convention that in my view is relevant for this. giacomo mazzone:Jorge you mean this: (2) Review of briefing paper from Copenhagen facilitated discussion (http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo/2017-July/000046.html) Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I meant the conclusions drwan by Bruce Tonkin from the facilitated discussion Heather Forrest:+1 Greg - it seems to me that the lack of clarity on legal basis is exactly why we're here now (to answer Ken's question that started this discussion) Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):the Board Resolution is here: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resource… Thomas Rickert, WG Chair:What I pasted here is Article 53 Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):Both the Board Resolution and the conclusions of the facilitated discussion highlighted both the legal basis and the public policy considerations Greg Shatan:We don't need an explicit reference to domain names to find a legal basis. Greg Shatan:I thought we were looking at "rights protections." If we are not talking about legal rights, what kind of rights are we talking about? Alan Greenberg:We (ICANN and the GNSO) have sufficuent major issues to look at that we need to get this done quickly and move on. Greg Shatan:Jorge, can you provide more specific citations, please. Greg Shatan:Alan, I agree with the concern regarding bandwidth. You and I are in many of the same groups. But that doesn't support any particular conclusion. Greg Shatan:One could conclude that it takes many pages of verbiage, because there is no clear and succinct statement that can be made to show a basis for the claimed right for which protections are being requested. Mary Wong:@Jorge, the links to the Board resolution (which you also posted, thanks) and the GNSO Council resolution have been pasted in the Notes pod. Bruce's high level summary was in an email to the IGO-RC discussion group, dated 13 March: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/discussion-igo-rc/2017-March/000108.html Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Greg: I hope Mary may find the conclusion/summary of the facilitated dialogue. As for the Board Resolution this part is relevant: "(3) In considering the Board's request, the Council is requested to duly take into account these factors and the public policy advice to reserve the finite list of names of the Red Cross and Red Crescent National Societies, as recognized within the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, in all gTLDs." Heather Forrest:+1 Chuck - basis in law had significant impacts on the recommendations of the Reserved Names WG in 2007 Greg Shatan:Jorge, what "factors" is the quoted language referring to? The quoted language provides no support for any particular conclusions. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Mary: I feel you found the summary about IGOs - not the one on ICRC Mary Wong:@Chuck, @Thomas, I've pasted the factors that the discussion group, Board and Council considered in the Notes pod. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):"factors" refers I guess to the preceding parts of the Resolution, where legal basis and GAC Advice etc. are mentioned Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):sorry no sound Greg Shatan:Then I guess that is what we should be looking at, to see what they've said about legal basis. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):audio problems, sorry! Julie Bisland:would you like our operator to dial out to you? Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I'm ready I think Julie Bisland:yes, I see you have your speaker on now. Excellent! Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):the Board Resolution mentions the following public policy arguments included in GAC Advice: "and the global public policy considerations in the protections of the identifiers of the respective Red Cross and Red Crescent organizations from forms of misuse in the domain name system, including from fraud and embezzlement in times of humanitarian crises." Greg Shatan:Public policy is not a legal basis. Mary Wong:@Jorge, my apologies (re the wrong message from Bruce). I cannot at the moment find a summary of the Red Cross discussion but will resume looking after this call. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Mary: maybe the summary took the form of the proposed Board language? Greg Shatan:Where does the Geneva Convention mention the names of the national societies? (Not individually but as a class of "strings"). Mary Wong:@Greg, I believe there is mention in Article 44. Chuck Gomes:Am I the only one that would like us to use a systematic approach to deliberate on the questions we are tasked with answering? We seem to continue to talk about all questions together, which in my opinion makes it difficult to make progress. Why not focus on one charter question at a time, discuss whether the three Council criteria are satisfied and if not discuss whether there is a reasoable basis for making an exception? Alan Greenberg:Red Cross fraud is a bad thing, but protecting the country names will d onothing to protect against such fraud. We cannot stop similar names from being registered and we cannot protect against words such as tsumani or flod. SO let's not confuse the rationale. Greg Shatan:Chuck, I think that would be a very helpful and appropriate approach. Mary Wong:@Chuck, @Greg, our (staff) assumption was that the group is already on the question of "what is the reasonable basis" (e.g. law and/or public policy), as the Council's (and Board's) list of factors/criteria have already defined the scope for the group. Chuck Gomes:On which charter question Mary? Greg Shatan:I'm not asking for perfection. Just a reasonable and objective legal basis. Mary Wong:@Chuck, on the specific request to possibly amend the PDP recommendation concerning the names of the Red Cross National Societies and the two International Movement names., plus a limited, defined set of variants. Chuck Gomes:What charter question are we discussing now? Greg Shatan:Mary, where in Article 44? I'm looking at Art 44 and not seeing it. Mary Wong:@Chuck, all - the charter (scope) for this group was outlined in the Council resolution i.e. amend the original PDP recomemndation regarding the national society names, the two international movement names, and the agreed limited variant list. Greg Shatan:Art 44 is entitled "Combatants and prisoners of war." giacomo mazzone:I agree with what Jorge just said. it's a matter of public policy mainly (legal aspects are important but are a plus). aim of the group is to identify what's the best way to ensure this protection with the minimum of hurdles. Mary Wong:@Greg, it is Article 44 of the First Geneva Convention 1949, I believe. Mary Wong:https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Article.xsp?action=o… Jennifer Breckenridge:GC Convention 1- ARTICLE 44 With the exception of the cases mentioned in the following paragraphs of the present Article, the emblem of the Red Cross on a white ground and the words "Red Cross", or "Geneva Cross" may not be employed, either in time of peace or in time of war, except to indicate or to protect the medical units and establishments, the personnel and material protected by the present Convention and other Conventions dealing with similar matters. The same shall apply to the emblems mentioned in Article 38, second paragraph [ Link ] , in respect of the countries which use them. The National Red Cross Societies and other Societies designated in Article 26 [ Link ] shall have the right to use the distinctive emblem conferring the protection of the Convention only within the framework of the present paragraph. Furthermore, National Red Cross (Red Crescent, Red Lion and Sun) Societies may, in time of peace, in accordance with their national legislation, make use of the name and emblem of the Red Cros Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I feel the document really is clear enough, when the purpose is to understand Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):question tp Greg: have you read the 44-pager? Chuck Gomes:The language is not at all clear to me. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Chuck: of course, it is legal language Jennifer Breckenridge:continued.....for their other activities which are in conformity with the principles laid down by the International Red Cross Conferences. When those activities are carried out in time of war, the conditions for the use of the emblem shall be such that it cannot be considered as conferring the protection of the Convention; the emblem shall be comparatively small in size and may not be placed on armlets or on the roofs of buildings.The international Red Cross organizations and their duly authorized personnel shall be permitted to make use, at all times, of the emblem of the Red Cross on a white ground.As an exceptional measure, in conformity with national legislation and with the express permission of one of the National Red Cross (Red Crescent, Red Lion and Sun) Societies, the emblem of the Convention may be employed in time of peace to identify vehicles used as ambulances and to mark the position of aid stations exclusively assigned to the purpose of giving free treatment to the wounded or sick. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I feel the burden is on who is making questions and to refer to the 44-doc Mary Wong:All, will it help for staff to recirculate the provisions that Jennifer and Stephane cited/quoted, as well as Jennifer's statement on thsi call? Greg Shatan:The burden of proof is always on those trying to prove something. Chuck Gomes:Legal language can be clear and often is. This legal language is not. The explanations given may be valid but without them I never would have concluded that the national names need to be protected. All that seems clear is that they can use the emblems. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):well, they have in my view... with 44 pages... Greg Shatan:Your view is not in doubt, Jorge. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):when you make such an effort, the minimum is to be specific in the follow-up questions Greg Shatan:A for Effort, perhaps, but not an A for clarity. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I was a bit unsure about whether all had read it, as comments were being made to a completely unrelated provision of the Conventions... Greg Shatan:Having heard what has been said here, one can now form some more specific questions. Greg Shatan:Jorge, blame Google for pulling up the wrong Geneva Convention Art. 44. Jennifer Breckenridge:sorry its long and keeps cutting off the end of the clause... Mary Wong:@Jennifer, I put the link to the specific Article in the chat above. This entire chat will also be saved and circulatd to the list. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Greg: I'll agree on that ;P Greg Shatan:If we can avoid 1300-1400 UTC we can avoid overlap with CCWG. giacomo mazzone:who shall prepare the summary requested for point 2 ? it was not clear tome ... Julie Bisland:I’ll send out an email invite shortly, for 7 September 2017 at 14 :00 UTC Mary Wong:@Giacomo, staff will work with Thomas to follow up on the requests made on this call. Heather Forrest:just noting that 1400 utc is 00:00 for parts of APAC giacomo mazzone:thank Mary, could you circulate in advance to avoid that discussion endless will go on during the call Mary Wong:@Giacomo, yes, we will circulate to the list. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):thanks Thomas, all and regards

6 17

Recordings, Attendance & AC Chat for IGO-INGO Protections in all gTLDS PDP WG on Red Cross Names on 17 August 2017 at 13:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

Dear all, Please find the attendance attached, and the mp3, Adobe Connect recording and AC Chat below for the reconvened IGO-INGO Protections in all gTLDs PDP Working Group on Red Cross Names held on Thursday, 17 August 2017 at 13:00 UTC. Mp3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-17aug17-en.mp3< http:/audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-17aug17-en.mp3%0d> AC recording: https://participate.icann.org/p59acngik1a/<https://participate.icann.org/p59acngik1a/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=92ef84797cbc0a40…> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar Mailing list archive: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo/ Agenda Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/-g8hB ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Thank you. Kind regards, Julie --------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for 17 August 2017 Julie Bisland:Welcome to the Reconvened IGO INGO PDP Working Group call on Red Cross Names on Thursday, 17 August 2017 at 13:00 UTC. Julie Bisland:Agenda wiki page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_… Julie Bisland:looking for the beeping Heather Forrest:Beeping noise? Julie Bisland:Welcome Ken Stubbs :) Julie Bisland:Welcome Giacomo Mazzone ken stubbs:who is speaking ? Heather Forrest:It's not clear to me how protection of "Red Cross", etc and symbols covers the national society names ken stubbs:i have a question after ther speakers comments are over. Thomas Rickert, WG Chair:Noted, Ken! Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):Thanks to Stephane for the explanations! Greg Shatan:I second Heather's question. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):Apart from change in the law, there is also the possibility that the PDP WG was not fully aware of the legal basis - as Thomas is hinting, I feel Heather Forrest:So back to my earlier chat comment - it's not clear to me how the national society names fit here in the Geneva Convention Greg Shatan:We are still not "fully aware" of the legal basis, if any, for this request. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I feel that Stephane has explained it quite well... Greg Shatan:no, sorry, he talked around the specific issue, hence the question. Chuck Gomes:My understanding is that staff was going to provide the WG with the legal basis for the national society names. Is that correct? If not, I think that would be a good action item before our next meeting. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):As Stephane apparently is not on the adobe maybe the question could be read aloud and/or circulated in writing Mary Wong:@Chuck, by circulating the Red Cross' position paper and the Briefing Document that was used in Copenhagen (which was prepared by staff and Bruce Tonkin), this group can fully discusss that question. We didn't feel it's our place (as staff) to draw legal conclusions specifically. Chuck Gomes:@ Mary: You don't need to draw legal conclusions but you could summarize the legal basis for protection of the national names. ken stubbs:your talking over each other Mary Wong:@Chuck, understood - but note that the Geneva Conventions and the Protocols do not specifically mention the National Society names, or what specific names associaed with the Red Cross are intended by use of the terms "emblem" and "designations" therein. Hence, we felt it was for the WG - with the assistance of the RC reps - to clarify what, exactly, is the scope of the law as a result (especially in the DNS). Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Mary: could you circulate the conclusions of the facilitated dialogue of Copenhagen as well as the relevant Board Resolution? thanks Mary Wong:@Jorge, of course - hang on just a moment. Thomas Rickert, WG Chair:The use by individuals, societies, firms or companies either public or private, other than those entitled thereto under the present Convention, of the emblem or the designation "Red Cross" or "Geneva Cross", or any sign or designation constituting an imitation thereof, whatever the object of such use, and irrespective of the date of its adoption, shall be prohibited at all times.By reason of the tribute paid to Switzerland by the adoption of the reversed Federal colours, and of the confusion which may arise between the arms of Switzerland and the distinctive emblem of the Convention, the use by private individuals, societies or firms, of the arms of the Swiss Confederation, or of marks constituting an imitation thereof, whether as trademarks or commercial marks, or as parts of such marks, or for a purpose contrary to commercial honesty, or in circumstances capable of wounding Swiss national sentiment, shall be prohibited at all times.Nevertheless, such High Contracting Parties as were not party to the Geneva Thomas Rickert, WG Chair:That is the part of the Geneva Convention that in my view is relevant for this. giacomo mazzone:Jorge you mean this: (2) Review of briefing paper from Copenhagen facilitated discussion (http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo/2017-July/000046.html) Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I meant the conclusions drwan by Bruce Tonkin from the facilitated discussion Heather Forrest:+1 Greg - it seems to me that the lack of clarity on legal basis is exactly why we're here now (to answer Ken's question that started this discussion) Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):the Board Resolution is here: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resource… Thomas Rickert, WG Chair:What I pasted here is Article 53 Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):Both the Board Resolution and the conclusions of the facilitated discussion highlighted both the legal basis and the public policy considerations Greg Shatan:We don't need an explicit reference to domain names to find a legal basis. Greg Shatan:I thought we were looking at "rights protections." If we are not talking about legal rights, what kind of rights are we talking about? Alan Greenberg:We (ICANN and the GNSO) have sufficuent major issues to look at that we need to get this done quickly and move on. Greg Shatan:Jorge, can you provide more specific citations, please. Greg Shatan:Alan, I agree with the concern regarding bandwidth. You and I are in many of the same groups. But that doesn't support any particular conclusion. Greg Shatan:One could conclude that it takes many pages of verbiage, because there is no clear and succinct statement that can be made to show a basis for the claimed right for which protections are being requested. Mary Wong:@Jorge, the links to the Board resolution (which you also posted, thanks) and the GNSO Council resolution have been pasted in the Notes pod. Bruce's high level summary was in an email to the IGO-RC discussion group, dated 13 March: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/discussion-igo-rc/2017-March/000108.html Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Greg: I hope Mary may find the conclusion/summary of the facilitated dialogue. As for the Board Resolution this part is relevant: "(3) In considering the Board's request, the Council is requested to duly take into account these factors and the public policy advice to reserve the finite list of names of the Red Cross and Red Crescent National Societies, as recognized within the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, in all gTLDs." Heather Forrest:+1 Chuck - basis in law had significant impacts on the recommendations of the Reserved Names WG in 2007 Greg Shatan:Jorge, what "factors" is the quoted language referring to? The quoted language provides no support for any particular conclusions. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Mary: I feel you found the summary about IGOs - not the one on ICRC Mary Wong:@Chuck, @Thomas, I've pasted the factors that the discussion group, Board and Council considered in the Notes pod. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):"factors" refers I guess to the preceding parts of the Resolution, where legal basis and GAC Advice etc. are mentioned Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):sorry no sound Greg Shatan:Then I guess that is what we should be looking at, to see what they've said about legal basis. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):audio problems, sorry! Julie Bisland:would you like our operator to dial out to you? Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I'm ready I think Julie Bisland:yes, I see you have your speaker on now. Excellent! Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):the Board Resolution mentions the following public policy arguments included in GAC Advice: "and the global public policy considerations in the protections of the identifiers of the respective Red Cross and Red Crescent organizations from forms of misuse in the domain name system, including from fraud and embezzlement in times of humanitarian crises." Greg Shatan:Public policy is not a legal basis. Mary Wong:@Jorge, my apologies (re the wrong message from Bruce). I cannot at the moment find a summary of the Red Cross discussion but will resume looking after this call. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Mary: maybe the summary took the form of the proposed Board language? Greg Shatan:Where does the Geneva Convention mention the names of the national societies? (Not individually but as a class of "strings"). Mary Wong:@Greg, I believe there is mention in Article 44. Chuck Gomes:Am I the only one that would like us to use a systematic approach to deliberate on the questions we are tasked with answering? We seem to continue to talk about all questions together, which in my opinion makes it difficult to make progress. Why not focus on one charter question at a time, discuss whether the three Council criteria are satisfied and if not discuss whether there is a reasoable basis for making an exception? Alan Greenberg:Red Cross fraud is a bad thing, but protecting the country names will d onothing to protect against such fraud. We cannot stop similar names from being registered and we cannot protect against words such as tsumani or flod. SO let's not confuse the rationale. Greg Shatan:Chuck, I think that would be a very helpful and appropriate approach. Mary Wong:@Chuck, @Greg, our (staff) assumption was that the group is already on the question of "what is the reasonable basis" (e.g. law and/or public policy), as the Council's (and Board's) list of factors/criteria have already defined the scope for the group. Chuck Gomes:On which charter question Mary? Greg Shatan:I'm not asking for perfection. Just a reasonable and objective legal basis. Mary Wong:@Chuck, on the specific request to possibly amend the PDP recommendation concerning the names of the Red Cross National Societies and the two International Movement names., plus a limited, defined set of variants. Chuck Gomes:What charter question are we discussing now? Greg Shatan:Mary, where in Article 44? I'm looking at Art 44 and not seeing it. Mary Wong:@Chuck, all - the charter (scope) for this group was outlined in the Council resolution i.e. amend the original PDP recomemndation regarding the national society names, the two international movement names, and the agreed limited variant list. Greg Shatan:Art 44 is entitled "Combatants and prisoners of war." giacomo mazzone:I agree with what Jorge just said. it's a matter of public policy mainly (legal aspects are important but are a plus). aim of the group is to identify what's the best way to ensure this protection with the minimum of hurdles. Mary Wong:@Greg, it is Article 44 of the First Geneva Convention 1949, I believe. Mary Wong:https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Article.xsp?action=o… Jennifer Breckenridge:GC Convention 1- ARTICLE 44 With the exception of the cases mentioned in the following paragraphs of the present Article, the emblem of the Red Cross on a white ground and the words "Red Cross", or "Geneva Cross" may not be employed, either in time of peace or in time of war, except to indicate or to protect the medical units and establishments, the personnel and material protected by the present Convention and other Conventions dealing with similar matters. The same shall apply to the emblems mentioned in Article 38, second paragraph [ Link ] , in respect of the countries which use them. The National Red Cross Societies and other Societies designated in Article 26 [ Link ] shall have the right to use the distinctive emblem conferring the protection of the Convention only within the framework of the present paragraph. Furthermore, National Red Cross (Red Crescent, Red Lion and Sun) Societies may, in time of peace, in accordance with their national legislation, make use of the name and emblem of the Red Cros Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I feel the document really is clear enough, when the purpose is to understand Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):question tp Greg: have you read the 44-pager? Chuck Gomes:The language is not at all clear to me. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Chuck: of course, it is legal language Jennifer Breckenridge:continued.....for their other activities which are in conformity with the principles laid down by the International Red Cross Conferences. When those activities are carried out in time of war, the conditions for the use of the emblem shall be such that it cannot be considered as conferring the protection of the Convention; the emblem shall be comparatively small in size and may not be placed on armlets or on the roofs of buildings.The international Red Cross organizations and their duly authorized personnel shall be permitted to make use, at all times, of the emblem of the Red Cross on a white ground.As an exceptional measure, in conformity with national legislation and with the express permission of one of the National Red Cross (Red Crescent, Red Lion and Sun) Societies, the emblem of the Convention may be employed in time of peace to identify vehicles used as ambulances and to mark the position of aid stations exclusively assigned to the purpose of giving free treatment to the wounded or sick. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I feel the burden is on who is making questions and to refer to the 44-doc Mary Wong:All, will it help for staff to recirculate the provisions that Jennifer and Stephane cited/quoted, as well as Jennifer's statement on thsi call? Greg Shatan:The burden of proof is always on those trying to prove something. Chuck Gomes:Legal language can be clear and often is. This legal language is not. The explanations given may be valid but without them I never would have concluded that the national names need to be protected. All that seems clear is that they can use the emblems. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):well, they have in my view... with 44 pages... Greg Shatan:Your view is not in doubt, Jorge. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):when you make such an effort, the minimum is to be specific in the follow-up questions Greg Shatan:A for Effort, perhaps, but not an A for clarity. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):I was a bit unsure about whether all had read it, as comments were being made to a completely unrelated provision of the Conventions... Greg Shatan:Having heard what has been said here, one can now form some more specific questions. Greg Shatan:Jorge, blame Google for pulling up the wrong Geneva Convention Art. 44. Jennifer Breckenridge:sorry its long and keeps cutting off the end of the clause... Mary Wong:@Jennifer, I put the link to the specific Article in the chat above. This entire chat will also be saved and circulatd to the list. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):@Greg: I'll agree on that ;P Greg Shatan:If we can avoid 1300-1400 UTC we can avoid overlap with CCWG. giacomo mazzone:who shall prepare the summary requested for point 2 ? it was not clear tome ... Julie Bisland:I'll send out an email invite shortly, for 7 September 2017 at 14 :00 UTC Mary Wong:@Giacomo, staff will work with Thomas to follow up on the requests made on this call. Heather Forrest:just noting that 1400 utc is 00:00 for parts of APAC giacomo mazzone:thank Mary, could you circulate in advance to avoid that discussion endless will go on during the call Mary Wong:@Giacomo, yes, we will circulate to the list. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):thanks Thomas, all and regards

1 0

FW: Follow-up to the second WG call of 20 July 2017 - Reconvened IGO-INGO Working Group on Red Cross and Red Crescent Names and Identifiers
by James M. Bladel Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

Team – My intention was to send this reply to the entire group, not off-list. Thanks— J. From: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel(a)godaddy.com> Date: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 11:26 To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo] Follow-up to the second WG call of 20 July 2017 - Reconvened IGO-INGO Working Group on Red Cross and Red Crescent Names and Identifiers Sorry, Greg. I mean they are "in scope," insofar as this WG can refer them to the existing PDP on curative rights. I think we are saying the same thing. Apologies for my being unclear. On Aug 8, 2017 at 11:19, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com> wrote: James, I'm curious to know how you came to the conclusion that acronyms are in scope? Looking at the background for this reconvened WG, I came to the opposite conclusion (as stated in my prior email). Thanks! Greg On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 11:34 AM, jbladel(a)godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com> <jbladel(a)godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com>> wrote: Thanks, Chuck. Well, acronyms are in scope, insomuch as we acknowledge that they are more suited for inclusion in the work on IGO/INGO Curative Rights (as Stephane points out). Thanks— J. From: Chuck Gomes Consulting <consult(a)cgomes.com<mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> on behalf of Chuck Gomes Consulting <consult(a)cgomes.com<mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> Date: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 10:19 To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel(a)godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com>>, 'Stephane Hankins' <shankins(a)icrc.org<mailto:shankins@icrc.org>> Cc: "'gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>'" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>>, "gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org>" <gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org>> Subject: RE: [Gnso-igo-ingo] Follow-up to the second WG call of 20 July 2017 - Reconvened IGO-INGO Working Group on Red Cross and Red Crescent Names and Identifiers James, In my opinion you summarized the issues of our work in a concise, clear and useful manner, understanding that acronyms are apparently out of scope for this WG. Thanks. Chuck From: jbladel(a)godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com> [mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com>] Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 6:31 AM To: Chuck Gomes Consulting <consult(a)cgomes.com<mailto:consult@cgomes.com>>; 'Stephane Hankins' <shankins(a)icrc.org<mailto:shankins@icrc.org>> Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>; gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo] Follow-up to the second WG call of 20 July 2017 - Reconvened IGO-INGO Working Group on Red Cross and Red Crescent Names and Identifiers Thanks to Chuck, Stephane and especially Charlotte for their valuable contributions in this thread. If we go back to the Facilitated Discussions in Copenhagen, we landed on three factors for reconsidering protections for RC/RC strings in the DNS (note, these are also reflected in the GNSO Council resolution that re-activated this PDP). Roughly paraphrased, they were: * That the protections were based upon / reflected in national and international law, and * That the list of covered strings was finite, and was amended only via consistent & visible processes, and * There were no other legitimate uses for the string. Circling back to Charlotte’s message, her points (1) and (2) and (3) are meant to establish that the first two tests are being met. Similarly, points (3) and (5) help to define the list of covered strings as finite, and only occasionally modified via well-established processes (Marshall Islands). However, I believe that point (4) (ICRC and IFRC) fail the third test: requiring that there are no other legitimate uses for the strings. This is always a problem with acronyms, as they often collide with unrelated terms, organizations, or industries. For example, a quick search of “ICRC” notes that while this string is commonly associated with the International Committee of the Red Cross, it is also used by the Indiana Civil Rights Commission, the International Certification and Reciprocity Consortium, the Intercollege Relations Commission, and the International Conference of Reformed Churches. Policies should not prohibit or reserve the use of these strings in gTLDs, but rather ensure access to curative rights for the RC (or any of the other organizations) that are harmed when these strings are abused. Thanks— J. From: <gnso-igo-ingo-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Chuck Gomes Consulting <consult(a)cgomes.com<mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> Date: Monday, August 7, 2017 at 10:51 To: 'Stephane Hankins' <shankins(a)icrc.org<mailto:shankins@icrc.org>> Cc: "'gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>'" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>>, "gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org>" <gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo] Follow-up to the second WG call of 20 July 2017 - Reconvened IGO-INGO Working Group on Red Cross and Red Crescent Names and Identifiers Stephane, You in essence did what I was suggesting Charlotte do. It wasn’t that I didn’t understand but rather that it was a fairly complicated and long message that I thought would benefit from a simpler explanation. Chuck From: Stephane Hankins [mailto:shankins@icrc.org] Sent: Monday, August 7, 2017 12:50 AM To: Chuck Gomes Consulting <consult(a)cgomes.com<mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> Cc: 'Charlotte Lindsey Curtet' <clindsey(a)icrc.org<mailto:clindsey@icrc.org>>; gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org>; gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo] Follow-up to the second WG call of 20 July 2017 - Reconvened IGO-INGO Working Group on Red Cross and Red Crescent Names and Identifiers Dear Chuck, Could you kindly clarify for us what is unclear. Charlotte's message below is to us written in a reasonably plain language. Point (2) aims to explicate what, in our understanding, an ammendment to the GNSO's 2013 Recommendations would imply in order to achieve a reconciliation with past GAC advice. Point (3) suggests that in the interest of achieving a reconciliation of the 2013 GNSO recommendation and GAC advice, consideration would also require to be given to the full names of the ICRC and of the International Federation (the two international bodies within the International red Cross and Red Crescent Movement), in addition to the identifiers of National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. Point (4) confirms our ask regarding the ICRC and IFRC acronyms and suggests that the reconvened WG also consider to issue a recommendation in regard to the latter (in line with the GAC advice). Point (5) recalls our availability to provide a revised list of name in the interest of consistency, as discussed and requested in Copenhagen. If the concern is regarding the attachments, please advise what you think could be helpful. The suggestion was made, if I am not mistaken during the last WG session, that further clarity be provided regarding the legal grounds for the protections for the Red Cross and Red Crescent identifiers - this is what the attached Report (and its annexes) seek to provide. Many thanks and kind regards, Stéphane (and Charlotte - presently on leave) From: "Chuck Gomes Consulting" <consult(a)cgomes.com<mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> To: "'Charlotte Lindsey Curtet'" <clindsey(a)icrc.org<mailto:clindsey@icrc.org>>, <gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org>> Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> Date: 06.08.2017 19:11 Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo] Follow-up to the second WG call of 20 July 2017 - Reconvened IGO-INGO Working Group on Red Cross and Red Crescent Names and Identifiers Sent by: gnso-igo-ingo-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-bounces@icann.org> ________________________________ Thanks for this Charlotte. I appreciate the need for being precise when writing legal language but found that I had to read this several times to grasp what is said. It would be helpful for me if your message was briefly summarized with a list of the key points made. Chuck From: gnso-igo-ingo-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Charlotte Lindsey Curtet Sent: Friday, August 4, 2017 4:46 AM To: gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org> Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-igo-ingo] Follow-up to the second WG call of 20 July 2017 - Reconvened IGO-INGO Working Group on Red Cross and Red Crescent Names and Identifiers Dear Thomas, dear James, Dear Members of the reconvened Working Group, (1) Further to the discussions held during the second meeting of the reconvened Working group IGO/INGO Protections PDP Working Group held on 20 July, please find attached a copy of the Non-paper we had submitted to ICANN’s Board and to the process in 2013. The attached includes a descriptive of the legal protections of the Red Cross, Red Crescent and Red Crystal designations and of the names/identifiers of the respective Red Cross and Red Crescent organizations under international law and under the domestic laws in force in multiple national jurisdictions. It includes as an annex an outline of relevant extracts from the first Geneva Convention of 1949 and of the third Additional Protocol adopted in 2005, and a list of national laws in force in different national jurisdictions on the use and protection of the emblems and their designations (the list would require now to be updated to include more recent national laws/Governmental decrees, as adopted inter alia in South Sudan, Sweden and Venezuela). (2) We take note, as underlined during the recent reconvened Working group discussions, of the WG’s defined objectives to determine whether the current protections accorded to the Red Cross and Red Crescent designations and identifiers (as included under Specification 5 of the Model Registry Agreement) should be confirmed as permanent. In line with the recommendations of the NGPC/the Board's Resolutions that the GNSO’s 2013 Recommendations be reconciled with the GAC’s consistent advice, this would imply that the GNSO’s 2013 recommendations be revised on two counts: - firstly, to extend the protections accorded to the Red Cross, Red Crescent and Red Crystal designations (Scope 1 identifiers) to the full exact match names of the respective Red Cross and Red Crescent organizations (Scope 2 identifiers); and - second, to confirm the protections of the Red Cross and Red Crescent designations and identifiers (Scope 1 and Scope 2) as permanent. (3) As recalled during the last reconvened Working Group session and in line with the GNSO’s decision to initiate its process for Amendments or Modifications of Approved Policies with regard to Recommendation 5 Section 3.1 of the 2013 Final Report, the extension of the protections should importantly be made to cover not only the names of the respective National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (190 in total to date), but also the full exact match names of the two international components of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement in the six UN languages. This is congruent with the definition of Scope 2 identifiers as included in the Final Report of the 2013 PDP – page 10. This is also confirmed under the Board’s Resolution (2017.03.16.13) and the latter's Operative paragraph (1). Reference is also made in this regard to the GAC’s consistent advice [as expressly stipulated in the GAC Communiqués adopted in Singapore (27 March 2014), Los Angeles (15 October 2014), Singapore (11 February 2015), and confirmed in subsequent advice] that the Red Cross and Red Crescent identifiers be afforded permanent protections. We wish to underline in this regard that the names of the International Committee of the Red Cross, of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, and of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement are included under Specification 5 to the Model Registry Agreement and already enjoy temporary protections. (4) With respect to the ICRC and IFRC acronyms (also included under the definition of Scope 2 names adopted by the GNSO in 2013), the extension of the permanent protections is not requested here, and thus in line with the GAC’s past advice, as adopted in Durban (18 July 2013), that “[t]he same complementary cost neutral mechanisms to be worked out […] for the protections of IGO’s be used to also protect the acronyms of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC/IFRC) and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC/FICR)”. Given however the importance of also protecting the acronyms of the ICRC and of the IFRC (particularly the ICRC acronym under which the ICRC is very commonly known and identified and which forms a part of the ICRC’s institutional logo), we would propose that the reconvened WG consider to issue also a recommendation in regard to the ICRC and IFRC acronyms in line with the GAC’s above-mentioned Durban Communiqué. (5) Lastly and further to recent exchanges with ICANN Staff, we wish to inform the members of the reconvened Working Group that, in line with the agreement during the Facilitated discussion held in Copenhagen, we are amenable to work further on a revised list of Red Cross and Red Crescent identifiers to replace the current list included under Specification 5 – this would notably aim to amend the current titles of the two categories of Red Cross and Red Crescent designations and identifiers (as these do not offer clarity) and to further harmonize the list of National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies identifiers (and their limited and well defined variations). We also wish members of the WG to note, as indicated during the Copenhagen discussion, that a new National Society is in the process of formation and recognition, namely the “Marshall Islands Red Cross Society” and that its name will also soon require to be added to the list. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you require any further clarification. With kind regards, Charlotte Charlotte Lindsey Curtet Director Communication and Information Management Department International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Tel: + 41 22 730 2773<tel:+41%2022%20730%2027%2073> email: clindsey(a)icrc.org<mailto:clindsey@icrc.org> Annexes: - ICRC and IFRC Position paper to ICANN's Board, July/August 2013: - Extracts from the Government Advisory Committee's Communiqués relevant to the protection of the Red Cross and Red Crescent designations and identifiers: =============================================================================== The ICRC - working to protect and assist people affected by armed conflict and other situations of violence. Find out more: www.icrc.org<http://www.icrc.org/> This e-mail is intended for the named recipient(s) only. Its contents are confidential and may only be retained by the named recipient (s) and may only be copied or disclosed with the consent of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). If you are not an intended recipient please delete this e-mail and notify the sender. =============================================================================== _______________________________________________ Gnso-igo-ingo mailing list Gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo ________________________________ The ICRC - working to protect and assist people affected by armed conflict and other situations of violence. Find out more: www.icrc.org<http://www.icrc.org> This e-mail is intended for the named recipient(s) only. Its contents are confidential and may only be retained by the named recipient(s) and may only be copied or disclosed with the consent of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). If you are not an intended recipient please delete this e-mail and notify the sender. ________________________________ _______________________________________________ Gnso-igo-ingo mailing list Gnso-igo-ingo(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo

3 2

Agenda - Reconvened IGO-INGO Protections PDP Working Group (Red Cross) - 17 August 2017 @ 13:00 UTC
by Berry Cobb Aug. 16, 2017

Aug. 16, 2017

Dear all, Please find below the proposed agenda for the next Working Group call (scheduled for Thursday 17 August at 13:00 UTC). Agenda: (0) Roll call, Agenda bash and SOI Updates (1) Review RCRC submission on the legal basis for protection of identifiers (http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo/2017-August/000047.html) (2) Review of briefing paper from Copenhagen facilitated discussion (http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo/2017-July/000046.html) (3) Review compilation of GAC Advice from prior communiques (will be sent to list shortly) Thank you. B Berry A. Cobb Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers 720.839.5735 mail(a)berrycobb.com @berrycobb

3 2

Follow-up to the second WG call of 20 July 2017 - Reconvened IGO-INGO Working Group on Red Cross and Red Crescent Names and Identifiers
by Charlotte Lindsey Curtet Aug. 8, 2017

Aug. 8, 2017

Dear Thomas, dear James, Dear Members of the reconvened Working Group, (1) Further to the discussions held during the second meeting of the reconvened Working group IGO/INGO Protections PDP Working Group held on 20 July, please find attached a copy of the Non-paper we had submitted to ICANN’s Board and to the process in 2013. The attached includes a descriptive of the legal protections of the Red Cross, Red Crescent and Red Crystal designations and of the names/identifiers of the respective Red Cross and Red Crescent organizations under international law and under the domestic laws in force in multiple national jurisdictions. It includes as an annex an outline of relevant extracts from the first Geneva Convention of 1949 and of the third Additional Protocol adopted in 2005, and a list of national laws in force in different national jurisdictions on the use and protection of the emblems and their designations (the list would require now to be updated to include more recent national laws/Governmental decrees, as adopted inter alia in South Sudan, Sweden and Venezuela). (2) We take note, as underlined during the recent reconvened Working group discussions, of the WG’s defined objectives to determine whether the current protections accorded to the Red Cross and Red Crescent designations and identifiers (as included under Specification 5 of the Model Registry Agreement) should be confirmed as permanent. In line with the recommendations of the NGPC/the Board's Resolutions that the GNSO’s 2013 Recommendations be reconciled with the GAC’s consistent advice, this would imply that the GNSO’s 2013 recommendations be revised on two counts: - firstly, to extend the protections accorded to the Red Cross, Red Crescent and Red Crystal designations (Scope 1 identifiers) to the full exact match names of the respective Red Cross and Red Crescent organizations (Scope 2 identifiers); and - second, to confirm the protections of the Red Cross and Red Crescent designations and identifiers (Scope 1 and Scope 2) as permanent. (3) As recalled during the last reconvened Working Group session and in line with the GNSO’s decision to initiate its process for Amendments or Modifications of Approved Policies with regard to Recommendation 5 Section 3.1 of the 2013 Final Report, the extension of the protections should importantly be made to cover not only the names of the respective National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (190 in total to date), but also the full exact match names of the two international components of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement in the six UN languages. This is congruent with the definition of Scope 2 identifiers as included in the Final Report of the 2013 PDP – page 10. This is also confirmed under the Board’s Resolution (2017.03.16.13) and the latter's Operative paragraph (1). Reference is also made in this regard to the GAC’s consistent advice [as expressly stipulated in the GAC Communiqués adopted in Singapore (27 March 2014), Los Angeles (15 October 2014), Singapore (11 February 2015), and confirmed in subsequent advice] that the Red Cross and Red Crescent identifiers be afforded permanent protections. We wish to underline in this regard that the names of the International Committee of the Red Cross, of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, and of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement are included under Specification 5 to the Model Registry Agreement and already enjoy temporary protections. (4) With respect to the ICRC and IFRC acronyms (also included under the definition of Scope 2 names adopted by the GNSO in 2013), the extension of the permanent protections is not requested here, and thus in line with the GAC’s past advice, as adopted in Durban (18 July 2013), that “[t]he same complementary cost neutral mechanisms to be worked out […] for the protections of IGO’s be used to also protect the acronyms of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC/IFRC) and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC/FICR)”. Given however the importance of also protecting the acronyms of the ICRC and of the IFRC (particularly the ICRC acronym under which the ICRC is very commonly known and identified and which forms a part of the ICRC’s institutional logo), we would propose that the reconvened WG consider to issue also a recommendation in regard to the ICRC and IFRC acronyms in line with the GAC’s above-mentioned Durban Communiqué. (5) Lastly and further to recent exchanges with ICANN Staff, we wish to inform the members of the reconvened Working Group that, in line with the agreement during the Facilitated discussion held in Copenhagen, we are amenable to work further on a revised list of Red Cross and Red Crescent identifiers to replace the current list included under Specification 5 – this would notably aim to amend the current titles of the two categories of Red Cross and Red Crescent designations and identifiers (as these do not offer clarity) and to further harmonize the list of National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies identifiers (and their limited and well defined variations). We also wish members of the WG to note, as indicated during the Copenhagen discussion, that a new National Society is in the process of formation and recognition, namely the “Marshall Islands Red Cross Society” and that its name will also soon require to be added to the list. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you require any further clarification. With kind regards, Charlotte Charlotte Lindsey Curtet Director Communication and Information Management Department International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Tel: + 41 22 730 2773 email: clindsey(a)icrc.org Annexes: - ICRC and IFRC Position paper to ICANN's Board, July/August 2013: - Extracts from the Government Advisory Committee's Communiqués relevant to the protection of the Red Cross and Red Crescent designations and identifiers: =============================================================================== The ICRC - working to protect and assist people affected by armed conflict and other situations of violence. Find out more: www.icrc.org This e-mail is intended for the named recipient(s) only. Its contents are confidential and may only be retained by the named recipient (s) and may only be copied or disclosed with the consent of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). If you are not an intended recipient please delete this e-mail and notify the sender. ===============================================================================

5 11

FOR REVIEW: Follow up on Reconvened WG call of 20 July
by Mary Wong Aug. 7, 2017

Aug. 7, 2017

Dear all, As requested, please find attached the Briefing Document that was used as one of the reference documents for the facilitated GAC-GNSO discussion at ICANN58 in March 2017. You will see that Annex A of the document (Pages 7-10) contains an outline of the legal protections afforded to the Red Cross Movement and its National Societies, and that the document includes edits made by Red Cross representatives participating in the facilitated dialogue. The Briefing Document, as well as other documents used for that facilitated discussion, such as overview slides and an agreed Problem Statement, can also be found on this wiki page housing all such documents: https://community.icann.org/x/hIPRAw. As agreed on the 20 July call, Working Group members are kindly requested to review Annex A (and any other relevant documentation they may find helpful), with a view toward continuing the discussion as to the legal basis and scope of protection for the Red Cross National Society and International Movement names on this mailing list, prior to the next Working Group call (to be scheduled for mid-August). Thanks and cheers Mary

3 2

http://www.unicef-online.com/
by Evan Leibovitch July 24, 2017

July 24, 2017

FWIW, The site above was recently brought to my attention: http://www.unicef-online.com/ It's run out of Nigeria. Any activity that we undertake that doesn't prevent sites like this -- a clear attempt to divert public fundraising activity -- is a waste of our time and justifies any reaction that GAC can conceive. (BTW, this has been reported to local law enforcement. Without an identifiable victim, they've blown it off.) - Evan

3 2

Recordings, attendance & AC Chat for IGO-INGO Protections in all gTLDS PDP WG on Red Cross Names on 20 July 2017 13:00 UTC
by Michelle DeSmyter July 20, 2017

July 20, 2017

Dear all, Please find below the mp3, attendance, Adobe Connect recording and chat for the reconvened IGO-INGO Protections in all gTLDs PDP Working Group on Red Cross Names held on 20 July 2017 at 13:00 UTC. Mp3: Monark Panchal commented on ticket #563816 Hello Michelle, The request has been completed: https://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#jul https://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-20jul17-en.mp3[mailer.samanage.c…<Monark%20Panchal%20commented%20on%20ticket%20#563816 Hello%20Michelle, The%20request%20has%20been%20completed: https://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#jul%20 https://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-20jul17-en.mp3[mailer.samanage.c…> <Monark%20Panchal%20commented%20on%20ticket%20#563816 Hello%20Michelle, The%20request%20has%20been%20completed: https://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#jul%20 https://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-20jul17-en.mp3[mailer.samanage.c…> AC recording: https://participate.icann.org/p2oezh20mo0/ The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar[gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group…> Mailing list archive: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo/ Agenda Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/onfwAw ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle ——————————————— Adobe Connect chat transcript for 20 July 2017 Michelle DeSmyter:Dear All, Welcome to the Reconvened meeting of the IGO-INGO PDP Working Group call on Red Cross Names on Thursday, 20 July 2017 at 13:00 UTC Michelle DeSmyter:Meeting agenda wiki page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_… Chuck Gomes:Hello from California Heather Forrest:Hello from Tasmania! (how's that from 2 different ends of the earth, Chuck?) Chuck Gomes:I like it Heather. It's 6 am for me; what time is it for you? Thomas Rickert:just one sec Jeff Neuman:Is everyone hearing clicking Jeff Neuman:or is it just my connetion Jeff Neuman:connection Mason Cole - Donuts:I hear it too Jeff Chuck Gomes:I am hearing the clicking but it is fairly minor. Thomas Rickert:I am still hearing music on the audio bridge Michelle DeSmyter:k - I will alert the operator you are dialing in Thomas Rickert:sorry for this. Thomas Rickert:I am now waiting for the dial-out Chuck Gomes:I am on the audio bridge. Was connected quickly. Thomas Rickert:so sorry for making you wait Alan Greenberg:My audio quality really bad. Will reconnect to bridge. Alan Greenberg:I will not be able to stay for full 2 hr meeting. Heather Forrest:@Chuck - sorry, slow reply. 23:00 my local time (bedtime) Berry Cobb:Thomas, kill your AC mic, echo. Mary Wong:Please mute if you're not speaking, thanks Heather Forrest:The echo is terrible - can't really hear Marika Konings:If Thomas is on the telephone line, someone should mute his AC mic as it is open Marika Konings:looks like it is muted now :-) Marika Konings:much better! Marika Konings:I'm not on audio :- Marika Konings:Thanks for the intro Thomas :-) Heather Forrest:Happy retirement, Chuck! (funny how your retirement seems a lot like pre-retirement in ICANN-land) Steve Chan:Thomas, I'm not on audio either. ICANN GSNO Support staff. Alan Greenberg:Cannot hear heather Heather Forrest:Sorry - was my audio poor? Alan Greenberg:For me in any case! Berry Cobb:Heather, you came in faint. You might want to adjust your AC mic or consider dialing into audio bridge if you intend to contribute more on the call. Heather Forrest:Will do, thanks Berry. Quick summary: I was not on the original PDP, but as a member of GNSO Council leadership was involved in the facilitated discussion that led to the re-formation of this PDP WG. I am here mainly as an observer - happy to support as needed. Michelle DeSmyter:We do have Stephane Hankin on audio phone bridge only Mary Wong:At the time of PDP completion, there were 189 National Sociteties. Since then, one more has been added - so the total is now 190. Mary Wong:The Red Cross participants in the PDP also submitted a minority report to the Final Report. Evan Leibovitch:We also had the IOC to deal with. Mary Wong:@Evan, true - and both these orgs (RC and IOC) were the only NGOs for whom the GAC requested protections (although the PDP WG also came up with recommendations for all NGOs that appear on the UN ECOSOC list). Heather Forrest:Noting, following up on Thomas’s comment re acronyms, that the GNSO Council motion that recommended reforming this PDP WG, instructs only a review of recommendations in relation to names: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_coun… Alan Greenberg:Clearly we cannot (or should not) recommend something that is counter to the ICANN Bylaws. But I don't think that is equivalen to us having to make recommendations that have "legal basis". We cannot recommend anything counter to legality, but in theory, we do not have to have a legal basis. Alan Greenberg:ECHO!!!!!! Mary Wong:@Alan, I think what Thomas was addressing is the need for this WG (and the GNSO Council) to be clear about what the basis for protection is, should the original policy rec end up being changed. That will allow the Board to make a reasonaed decision as to whether, and what, to approve ultimately. Heather Forrest:Acronyms are not in scope per Council's motion. For the WG to consider acronyms, there needs to be a direction as such from Council. Mary Wong:@Heather, yes. And the Board request to the Council also only covered names, not acronyms. Greg Shatan:Did Stephane mention which treaty or treaties he was referring to? Evan Leibovitch:Beyond the legal and treaty issues, we (at least ALAC) also considered the real-world potential for fraud. The ICRC and its national entities engage in global fundraising, so there is a genuine possibility that use of their names within domains could be used to fraudulently solicit funds. Mary Wong:@Greg, I believe it was the Geneva Convention and the associated Protocols. Heather Forrest:It would be helpful to have circulated to the list the precise international legal provisions referred to by Stephane . Mary Wong:Conventions in the plural, I should have said Greg Shatan:Agree with Heather. Heather Forrest:Again given the complexity of the treaty language, in my view the WG should have the benefit of the actual provisions to read closely Mary Wong:Staff can circulate the briefing document that was prepared for the Copenhagen facilitated dialogue - that contains more background and informaton on the Geneva Conventions. Greg Shatan:We'll need to. see if that sets out the application of the Conventions to the particular facts at hand. Just having the language of the Conventions is only half of the task, or less. Greg Shatan:Alan, that seems to indicate some skepticism that there is a readily apparent legal basis for these protections. Evan Leibovitch:Agree with no need for indepdent advice Greg Shatan:Evan, what do you know that I don't know? Alan Greenberg:@Greg, I am not at all convinced that there is a strong legal reason for the requested protection. I believe there *IS* a strong public interest rationale for that protection. Greg Shatan:I think it would be rash to answer the question in the positive or the. negative, unless one doesn't care whether there's a legal basis for these protections. Alan Greenberg:The fact that legal protection is granted in some circumstances sends a strong message to me on the public interest perspective.. And THAT is linked to domain names Mary Wong:Does a next meeting on THursdays at this time work for all? Greg Shatan:But we don't know whether those circumstances are legally relevant to this discussion. Heather Forrest:It's late timing for Asia Pacific. Heather Forrest:But I might be the only APAC follower of the reconvened group, so it's not good reason to tinker with the timing Greg Shatan:I actually have a standing call at 14:00 UTC on Thursdays. It was cancelled for this week. Mary Wong:@Stephane, thank you - staff can assist with finding the information you mention if those were also provided to an ICANN mailing list at some point. Chuck Gomes:Thanks Thomas and all. Heather Forrest:Thanks Thomas Greg Shatan:Bye all.

1 0