Conference call: city names
Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
Thanks, Liz, for your thorough thoughts about this issue. Looking forward to an interesting discussion on Wednesday. Kindly Annebeth Annebeth B Lange UNINETT Norid AS 30. apr. 2018 kl. 07:19 skrev Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Hi Liz, The examples to work through are very useful. Focusing on your scenario for ‘Perth’ it may also be worth considering that the related places could create a co-operative agreement to operate the registry. We should not forget that the burden and risk associated with applying, launching and maintaining a TLD is significant and a co-operative approach may be welcomed by some who do not wish to take on these risks alone. It may also increase the potential use and wider demand for domains at the second level. Kind regards, Martin Sent from my iPhone On 30 Apr 2018, at 06:27, Annebeth Lange <annebeth.lange@norid.no<mailto:annebeth.lange@norid.no>> wrote: Thanks, Liz, for your thorough thoughts about this issue. Looking forward to an interesting discussion on Wednesday. Kindly Annebeth Annebeth B Lange UNINETT Norid AS 30. apr. 2018 kl. 07:19 skrev Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Hello Martin I am sure others will have examples of similar types of names that fit into the “Perth” category…my First Fleet convict relatives were not very original in naming places… And then to your more important point about encouraging collaboration (and reducing contention). During the 2005-2007 PDP process, a lot of thought went into how to create awareness of the new TLD process. I am not sure how successful it was nor am I sure how such programs such as Universal Acceptance have fared either. However, it is very worthwhile work to put into our discussions how ICANN could facilitate collaboration. Perhaps ICANN support staff could give us some more information that may have been collected in reviewing programs? There will remain contention because geographic terms (and any other type of TLD application) may be the subject of competing interests. We have to deal with both collaboration and contention and come up with suggestions about ways to handle it. Best wishes. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 30 Apr 2018, at 5:20 pm, Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org<mailto:martin@brandregistrygroup.org>> wrote: Hi Liz, The examples to work through are very useful. Focusing on your scenario for ‘Perth’ it may also be worth considering that the related places could create a co-operative agreement to operate the registry. We should not forget that the burden and risk associated with applying, launching and maintaining a TLD is significant and a co-operative approach may be welcomed by some who do not wish to take on these risks alone. It may also increase the potential use and wider demand for domains at the second level. Kind regards, Martin Sent from my iPhone On 30 Apr 2018, at 06:27, Annebeth Lange <annebeth.lange@norid.no<mailto:annebeth.lange@norid.no>> wrote: Thanks, Liz, for your thorough thoughts about this issue. Looking forward to an interesting discussion on Wednesday. Kindly Annebeth Annebeth B Lange UNINETT Norid AS 30. apr. 2018 kl. 07:19 skrev Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Liz and all, In order to gain a better understanding of your assertion that „(letters of non-objection) they are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).“ could you please refer to specific cases where such problema were observed in the 2012 round? Thanks and best regards Jorge ps: in the case of my Government at least, any decision from a public authority has to be motivated, based on law and is subject to review... ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> Datum: 30. April 2018 um 07:19:17 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
Hello Jorge I’d like to take your question in two parts. The first is that you’re absolutely correct that, in most cases, governments make decisions based on public law. However, I am not sure how “not objecting” fits with making decisions based on law. The concept of “non-objection” or tacit approval is, in the ICANN context, I think quite difficult and hasn’t served us well. Having “approval” to do something is regularly granted by governments based on, for example, licensing conditions for water rights, competition requirements for a telecommunications license, application processes for government funding. In the case we are talking about here, it is not the situation where governments grant approval for a top level domain. ICANN opens a process with rules and systems. Evaluators assess applications, the GAC may give advice, the Board considers that advice but national governments are not the arbiters of rights in top level domain applications. They are, nonetheless, important stakeholders. Then to the second part. There were many fights about who got the right to have the letters of support for a vast array of types of applications including community applications for .gay, .music and so on. And, of course, for geographic terms. The best (or worst depending on your position) example from the 2012 round is .africa which is well documented as is .amazon. Those conflicts happened after the application process because of, in the first instance, two applicants wanting the same term and, in the second, a global brand wishing to use its company name as a TLD which concerned governments with an important river running through their countries (a vastly over-simplified problem statement used only for illustration). Many more intense discussions happened before an application was submitted and there are others in the group who can speak to their experiences here. And then “letters of non-objection” are very different from letters of approval. If we are going to use these two different concepts, I would like us to be much clearer about whether they are effective tools to crystallise better applications that are evaluated more smoothly without reference to Board decisions. Of course, I welcome different views on other experiences in the hope that we can a) improve on our policy principles, b) our resulting policies and c) our implementation of those policies into more streamlined applications for geographic names. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 30 Apr 2018, at 5:40 pm, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote: Dear Liz and all, In order to gain a better understanding of your assertion that „(letters of non-objection) they are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).“ could you please refer to specific cases where such problema were observed in the 2012 round? Thanks and best regards Jorge ps: in the case of my Government at least, any decision from a public authority has to be motivated, based on law and is subject to review... ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 30. April 2018 um 07:19:17 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
Dear Liz Thanks for your response and for aknowledging that most Governments are bound by the rule of law... As to the „non-objection“ (or „support“) letter (I think the AGB 2012 allows for both), I feel it works well e.g. for Governments that have a completely „laisser-faire“ approach, for Governments who may investigate if the application has an impact on any public regulations/policies (and if satisfied that there are none, may just say so and ergo not object), for Governments that apply specific policies/regulations applicable to the names in question, etc. Not objecting is less than supporting - some Governments may lack a legal basis to support, but may have it to not-object (as they may have potential grounds for an objection). As to the examples you mention. I feel some or many of us know in some detail the cases of „.africa“ (which was a geoname under the 2012 AGB) and „.amazon“ (which was not - a circumstance that in my view facilitated the growth of this problem in the fordt place). As for „.africa“ there could be lengthy discussions, but I do not think that the instrument of the „non-objection“ letter was really at the source of the conflict... Anyway, I feel that it would be interesting to hear about other examples and first-hand experiences with difficulties. This could help us in assessing to what extent such potential issues could be addressed... best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> Datum: 30. April 2018 um 11:30:37 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello Jorge I’d like to take your question in two parts. The first is that you’re absolutely correct that, in most cases, governments make decisions based on public law. However, I am not sure how “not objecting” fits with making decisions based on law. The concept of “non-objection” or tacit approval is, in the ICANN context, I think quite difficult and hasn’t served us well. Having “approval” to do something is regularly granted by governments based on, for example, licensing conditions for water rights, competition requirements for a telecommunications license, application processes for government funding. In the case we are talking about here, it is not the situation where governments grant approval for a top level domain. ICANN opens a process with rules and systems. Evaluators assess applications, the GAC may give advice, the Board considers that advice but national governments are not the arbiters of rights in top level domain applications. They are, nonetheless, important stakeholders. Then to the second part. There were many fights about who got the right to have the letters of support for a vast array of types of applications including community applications for .gay, .music and so on. And, of course, for geographic terms. The best (or worst depending on your position) example from the 2012 round is .africa which is well documented as is .amazon. Those conflicts happened after the application process because of, in the first instance, two applicants wanting the same term and, in the second, a global brand wishing to use its company name as a TLD which concerned governments with an important river running through their countries (a vastly over-simplified problem statement used only for illustration). Many more intense discussions happened before an application was submitted and there are others in the group who can speak to their experiences here. And then “letters of non-objection” are very different from letters of approval. If we are going to use these two different concepts, I would like us to be much clearer about whether they are effective tools to crystallise better applications that are evaluated more smoothly without reference to Board decisions. Of course, I welcome different views on other experiences in the hope that we can a) improve on our policy principles, b) our resulting policies and c) our implementation of those policies into more streamlined applications for geographic names. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 30 Apr 2018, at 5:40 pm, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote: Dear Liz and all, In order to gain a better understanding of your assertion that „(letters of non-objection) they are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).“ could you please refer to specific cases where such problema were observed in the 2012 round? Thanks and best regards Jorge ps: in the case of my Government at least, any decision from a public authority has to be motivated, based on law and is subject to review... ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 30. April 2018 um 07:19:17 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
Dear All I do not think that we should analyse the distinction between support and non objection For me both has the same destiny When someone expresses no objection it implicitly means support . However , the option of non objection is a mire cautious expression than that of support Regards Kavouss Sent from my iPhone
On 30 Apr 2018, at 13:13, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Liz
Thanks for your response and for aknowledging that most Governments are bound by the rule of law...
As to the „non-objection“ (or „support“) letter (I think the AGB 2012 allows for both), I feel it works well e.g. for Governments that have a completely „laisser-faire“ approach, for Governments who may investigate if the application has an impact on any public regulations/policies (and if satisfied that there are none, may just say so and ergo not object), for Governments that apply specific policies/regulations applicable to the names in question, etc. Not objecting is less than supporting - some Governments may lack a legal basis to support, but may have it to not-object (as they may have potential grounds for an objection).
As to the examples you mention. I feel some or many of us know in some detail the cases of „.africa“ (which was a geoname under the 2012 AGB) and „.amazon“ (which was not - a circumstance that in my view facilitated the growth of this problem in the fordt place). As for „.africa“ there could be lengthy discussions, but I do not think that the instrument of the „non-objection“ letter was really at the source of the conflict...
Anyway, I feel that it would be interesting to hear about other examples and first-hand experiences with difficulties. This could help us in assessing to what extent such potential issues could be addressed...
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> Datum: 30. April 2018 um 11:30:37 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello Jorge
I’d like to take your question in two parts. The first is that you’re absolutely correct that, in most cases, governments make decisions based on public law. However, I am not sure how “not objecting” fits with making decisions based on law. The concept of “non-objection” or tacit approval is, in the ICANN context, I think quite difficult and hasn’t served us well. Having “approval” to do something is regularly granted by governments based on, for example, licensing conditions for water rights, competition requirements for a telecommunications license, application processes for government funding. In the case we are talking about here, it is not the situation where governments grant approval for a top level domain. ICANN opens a process with rules and systems. Evaluators assess applications, the GAC may give advice, the Board considers that advice but national governments are not the arbiters of rights in top level domain applications. They are, nonetheless, important stakeholders.
Then to the second part. There were many fights about who got the right to have the letters of support for a vast array of types of applications including community applications for .gay, .music and so on. And, of course, for geographic terms. The best (or worst depending on your position) example from the 2012 round is .africa which is well documented as is .amazon. Those conflicts happened after the application process because of, in the first instance, two applicants wanting the same term and, in the second, a global brand wishing to use its company name as a TLD which concerned governments with an important river running through their countries (a vastly over-simplified problem statement used only for illustration). Many more intense discussions happened before an application was submitted and there are others in the group who can speak to their experiences here.
And then “letters of non-objection” are very different from letters of approval. If we are going to use these two different concepts, I would like us to be much clearer about whether they are effective tools to crystallise better applications that are evaluated more smoothly without reference to Board decisions.
Of course, I welcome different views on other experiences in the hope that we can a) improve on our policy principles, b) our resulting policies and c) our implementation of those policies into more streamlined applications for geographic names.
Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 30 Apr 2018, at 5:40 pm, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Liz and all,
In order to gain a better understanding of your assertion that
„(letters of non-objection) they are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).“
could you please refer to specific cases where such problema were observed in the 2012 round?
Thanks and best regards
Jorge
ps: in the case of my Government at least, any decision from a public authority has to be motivated, based on law and is subject to review...
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 30. April 2018 um 07:19:17 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Liz, you concluded (and forgive me if I got you wrong): “As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application.” I am voicing objection (which is hard to do – as you are so likeable)! STRONG OBJECTION. First: All city applications WERE obviously “evaluated against business and technical criteria just like another application” – they were not handed out like candy! I am professionally dealing with city gTLDs since 2004 – about 13.5 years long. You do not have to be a genius – or being forced by ICANN policy – to map the underlying problems out, and solve them: * Constituents of the said city should be involved – for example via ownership and policy board (hence .berlin was a multi-stakeholder owned applicant – owned by hundreds of entities) * The applicant should not only be supported by the city – but also by its constituents (.berlin had several hundred supporting organizations each representing a constituency in the city) * If there is any mentionable city with an identical name: Go and get their support! (.berlin approached already in 2006 five other Berlins, even if they had all less than 20k inhabitants) * The sovereign of the target city should be closely involved and support the project actively (.berlin approached the city government already in 2005!) With .berlin we did all of the above BEFORE ICANN even STARTED the PDP back in 2006; in other words: voluntary and without being forced by policy. So to hear that we should have ZERO threshold for cities in the next round – just to make it “more fair”: Sorry, but no. If anything than the opposite. In my mind city applicants should be (like btw .berlin was set up in 2005 and then applied as) community applicants. It’s easy to waltz into a majors office and promise 85% of the (artificially diluted) profits to the city (shit happened in 2011 and 2012) and completely IGNORE the city’s constituents. Some applicants had ZERO roots or contact with the constituents of city – just got the major’s letter and applied. Not really cool. The idea that a river “New” would grant rights for a “.new” is preposterous. Obviously NOT. So if we are concerned (and the concern is very valid) that generic place names might be exploited to snag away generic gTLDs: why not simply limit both the objection rights AND the requirement for a letter of non-objection for strings that are IDENTICAL to a generic dictionary term? Last time I checked (and I checked a lot in the past 13 years) there is really just a very tiny amount of cities which bear a name that is identical to a generic term. In these few cases we might have to let some panel decide – but unlikely that we even GET such application. However I am very much in agreement with you that we have a clear problem regarding: * What size (or importance) of a geo location leads to “objection rights”; or the requirement for a letter of approval? If I apply for .frankfurt (a city that is somehow well known among other things because it has a quite frequented Airport) – could a tiny 8,000 people nest “Frankfurt” in Australia demand ransom to not object (or grant a letter of non-objection)? In other words: We need some objective for limitation on proof of “impact”. And we might need to utilize a panel here – to avoid IRP’s and other monstrous, time-consuming mechanisms. * The same is true if somebody applies for a generic term (.new, .save) or brand (.tata): What is the threshold for the requirement for a letter of non-objection? .bar and .tata were examples in 2012 …… these needed to provide letters of non-objection because they were listed in ISO 3166 – and the Tata region denied the letter. But outside of 3166: When is a region, river, area, city or mountain important enough so that the affiliated people (or rather their representatives) need to approve? Just because there is a “New River” in the U.S. – I do not think the people living at this tiny stream should be able to stop a .new! So instead saying that we are SCRAPPING all protections for the people living in a city – let’s better keep all protections; and figure out how to avoid that an applicant needs approval of a body that isn’t actually really “impacted” by the applied for gTLD. So what is “impact”? Well: If the condom brand “LONDON” applied for “.london” – and got the TLD: the citizens of London are deprived of their chance to use .london as identifier. If Donuts makes a .new for “new stuff” – are the people living along the New River in any way deprived of anything? The big question is: Are we able to find a “one size fits it all” rule to map this out – or do we say: “Well, we wanted to avoid beauty contests – but in these few rare cases only a panel will be able to decide: let’s both parties bring forward their arguments – then decide”. In my mind MUCH better than no protection at all – or some monstrous rule that attempts to regulate what is actually not easy to regulate at all. Example: Perth applies for .perth as singular applicant with the city’s approval. Two other Perth’s call the panel. A solution could be that the contestants agree to have a joined policy board – and every citizen in all Perth cities can apply for domains. The end goal is to PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF ALL PEOPLE AFFILIATED WITH A CERTAIN STRING! In the case of “Perth” that would be all people living in sizeable cities named Perth! It’s not about who is bigger, older or a capital. This isn’t a competition with ONE “winner” – we do not want “winners” but equal protections for people who might need a string to identify themselves. Maybe I am just not competitive enough; bit I still strongly believe we evolve the DNS to create benefits for the Internet users – not to “win” or “line our pockets with cash”. This is not about winners – but how to make sure that affected Internet users are served best. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Liz Williams Sent: Monday, April 30, 2018 8:19 AM To: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
Hello Liz, While I'm a strong supporter of delegation of GeoNames (as opposed to reservation and never using it) if by having ¨no special treatment¨ do you mean charging the same amounts for applications of a small community that where applied in the last round, I really have the feeling that you are translating the very strong bias prevalent in the 2012 AGB towards big companies and rich countries to subsequent rounds and I couldn't support this at all. And if you think that the last round´s late and misguided efforts to support applications from the Global South could help, then my expectations of any subsequent round disappear. If WT-5 can't open a fair and reasonable space for smaller cities and communities to have a FIRST RIGHT against the interest monopolistic ccTLDs (doesn't matter if privately owned or state supported) and large portfolio investors in Domain Names, then I'm afraid I'm in the wrong group (again). And I insist that I´m not asking for no more protection than a FIRST RIGHT. If the only approach possible for smaller communities is the market approach, and as a small community I would find myself having to choose between ICANN and my Government. I could only applaud that france.com went back to the French Government. --- Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- mQENBFqh7xwBCAC7PBUUek72U8teLrAieWI+JBo/nz0rQObzKgzGNWm2bb+i90mD roNsrvwDJiGOsB/VAhJy6ilIhs++QrxhVEzMz6oKJa8ANaNNvnK2Z8heYm1aC97E qY6y1z853b6F3XrN8262dor9NZEqaK28NVwLsFTfkGKhb4f3rJlCDmhwxt5VHhBQ MHKGxyutq0fyJpG6QpoAoRLaYXrq+xjXARhN9JBjeRRzbjnBbWt7+lRdCrZdOxfD ivRut9F2zMJq8RmeI5goTcq03IRLtKf41A6Np5K//HLe7GlHWH9g4pSKF+UB+EMe S506TxI0dVbyT3jlTnhhfNA/bpQXHcdCZ5EhABEBAAG0F2Nhcmxvc3JhdWxAZ3V0 aWVycmV6LnNliQEcBBABAgAGBQJaoe8cAAoJEOkK/VKjr2tvztgH/1zInwNszd4w 21UilxVmXX2J1SPZG6xXwbwU5BukIm7iBVYwxxPlIAZdJbG0/QynK2oWU1e1Zjed vBemfJtjOn2yRWo3P13PUV/2/trHWgUk5bA3eIUbWDW5fQRLW+TaHC7TuRKgRaJC NgdBItEniQz7DakGzld3PWmsTvIWd4N/fqzATD3DOZmONF52lyVuAEvKoF4rMRTR emvCrL66xEu19u9+Urk7R+DQuFQMNuX0MqC6/vIsmXYZPH7jnV6ZDyzb0BUnjYcx 6MH/YwJx29yjA4iN1NpwCpy1hc+YP1oavz2t+6isM6wB0mXlAazw2d83zwypsH6C 8xgjuRFm9xQ= =RX04 -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- El 2018-04-29 23:18, Liz Williams escribió:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the "success" of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a "is the word a capital city" question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don't have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don't recommend "letters of support or non-objection". They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
.... Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au [1]
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Links: ------ [1] http://www.auda.org.au
Hello Carlos You have raised a number of different points in your note. I am sorry I wasn’t clear in what I said. What I meant by “no special treatment” was with respect to application and evaluation criteria. The elements of what ICANN chooses to charge for an application fee wasn’t in my thinking. I would hope that, given our experience in previous rounds, we come up with a fairer cost-recovery model that is not a revenue generating exercise for ICANN and which is very burdensome on all applicants, wherever they come from. That discussion is, I think, outside of the scope of this group but, as Greg says, we don’t operate in a vacuum and it helps to be mindful of potential limitations on applicants. I don’t agree with your position on “first right”. That is special treatment which is not the way we want to go because it is never objective and generally turns out badly. We should be looking to support/encourage/facilitate applications from wherever, without bias. Having first hand experience of supporting applications in the 2012 round, the costs and time of the application process were terribly difficult for any kind of applicant whether they were from north, south or anywhere between. Front loading the process with a system of joining together interested applicants with supporters can work…if there is enough time given to the process. Thinking about how to support applicants could be something that the Global Stakeholder Engagement team takes on. Again, outside the scope of WT5 but it needs to be done somewhere. I also don’t agree with your position about "interest monopolistic ccTLDs (doesn’t matter if privately owned or state supported) and large portfolio investors in Domain Names”. Firstly, the application system was open to anyone to apply if they met the criteria; secondly most ccTLD providers serve local communities and, in the main, have opened up enormous new opportunities in the 2012 to not only secure their ongoing future with new revenue streams but also to serve new cities and regions within their operations. Portfolio investors are critical to the expansion of the domain name system. Without them, the industry percolates along at a steady rate but doesn’t grow. The maturity of the market; the competition between applicants; the opportunities for investors; the new business opportunities for technical service providers, registrars, escrow providers, marketers and so on, for me far outweighs perceived downsides of that shift in the landscape. That landscape is also part of ICANN’s mission to increase competition and choice for consumers. And to your last point, I am not sure what you mean by choosing between ICANN and your government. However, the France.com<http://France.com> example is the poster child for inconsistency and mix ups in the treatment of geographic terms at the second level. There are many others and I am not sure how to put that genie back into the bottle but we need to be very careful arguing for specific things to happen at the top level like .france when registrations of geographic terms at the second level across all types of TLDs is so inconsistent and likely cannot change that much. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 30 Apr 2018, at 11:22 pm, Carlos Raul Gutierrez <carlosraul@gutierrez.se<mailto:carlosraul@gutierrez.se>> wrote: Hello Liz, While I’m a strong supporter of delegation of GeoNames (as opposed to reservation and never using it) if by having ¨no special treatment¨ do you mean charging the same amounts for applications of a small community that where applied in the last round, I really have the feeling that you are translating the very strong bias prevalent in the 2012 AGB towards big companies and rich countries to subsequent rounds and I couldn’t support this at all. And if you think that the last round´s late and misguided efforts to support applications from the Global South could help, then my expectations of any subsequent round disappear. If WT-5 can’t open a fair and reasonable space for smaller cities and communities to have a FIRST RIGHT against the interest monopolistic ccTLDs (doesn’t matter if privately owned or state supported) and large portfolio investors in Domain Names, then I’m afraid I’m in the wrong group (again). And I insist that I´m not asking for no more protection than a FIRST RIGHT. If the only approach possible for smaller communities is the market approach, and as a small community I would find myself having to choose between ICANN and my Government. I could only applaud that france.com<http://france.com> went back to the French Government. --- Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- mQENBFqh7xwBCAC7PBUUek72U8teLrAieWI+JBo/nz0rQObzKgzGNWm2bb+i90mD roNsrvwDJiGOsB/VAhJy6ilIhs++QrxhVEzMz6oKJa8ANaNNvnK2Z8heYm1aC97E qY6y1z853b6F3XrN8262dor9NZEqaK28NVwLsFTfkGKhb4f3rJlCDmhwxt5VHhBQ MHKGxyutq0fyJpG6QpoAoRLaYXrq+xjXARhN9JBjeRRzbjnBbWt7+lRdCrZdOxfD ivRut9F2zMJq8RmeI5goTcq03IRLtKf41A6Np5K//HLe7GlHWH9g4pSKF+UB+EMe S506TxI0dVbyT3jlTnhhfNA/bpQXHcdCZ5EhABEBAAG0F2Nhcmxvc3JhdWxAZ3V0 aWVycmV6LnNliQEcBBABAgAGBQJaoe8cAAoJEOkK/VKjr2tvztgH/1zInwNszd4w 21UilxVmXX2J1SPZG6xXwbwU5BukIm7iBVYwxxPlIAZdJbG0/QynK2oWU1e1Zjed vBemfJtjOn2yRWo3P13PUV/2/trHWgUk5bA3eIUbWDW5fQRLW+TaHC7TuRKgRaJC NgdBItEniQz7DakGzld3PWmsTvIWd4N/fqzATD3DOZmONF52lyVuAEvKoF4rMRTR emvCrL66xEu19u9+Urk7R+DQuFQMNuX0MqC6/vIsmXYZPH7jnV6ZDyzb0BUnjYcx 6MH/YwJx29yjA4iN1NpwCpy1hc+YP1oavz2t+6isM6wB0mXlAazw2d83zwypsH6C 8xgjuRFm9xQ= =RX04 -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- El 2018-04-29 23:18, Liz Williams escribió: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the "success" of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a "is the word a capital city" question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don't have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don't recommend "letters of support or non-objection". They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz .... Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the *droit de seigneur*, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> > wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> > wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:927434c1-ec28-4bf3-a1ea-f383444b46cd] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Thank you, Yrjö. Quite interesting! Javier Rúa-Jovet +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 2, 2018, at 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro <yrjo_lansipuro@hotmail.com> wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
<pastedImage.png>
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM *To:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: */“…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”/*
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
*From:*Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Greg Shatan *Sent:* Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM *To:* David Cake <dave@davecake.net> *Cc:* leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the /droit de seigneur/, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. *The Geo Case*: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. *The Non-Geo Case*: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
------------------------------ *From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM *To:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: *“…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”*
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
*From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Greg Shatan *Sent:* Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM *To:* David Cake <dave@davecake.net> <dave@davecake.net> *Cc:* leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann. org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the *droit de seigneur*, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing listGnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2B8.146CA280] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
*Von:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] *Im Auftrag von *Greg Shatan *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 *An:* Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> *Cc:* Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> *Betreff:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. *The Geo Case*: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa)
2. *The Non-Geo Case*: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
------------------------------
*From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM *To:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: *“…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”*
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
*From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Greg Shatan *Sent:* Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM *To:* David Cake <dave@davecake.net> <dave@davecake.net> *Cc:* leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann. org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the *droit de seigneur*, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; mmoll@ca.inter.net; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
*Von:* Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com] *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 *An:* Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> *Cc:* Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; mmoll@ca.inter.net; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org *Betreff:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
*Von:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] *Im Auftrag von *Greg Shatan *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 *An:* Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> *Cc:* Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> *Betreff:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. *The Geo Case*: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa)
2. *The Non-Geo Case*: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
------------------------------
*From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM *To:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: *“…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”*
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
*From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Greg Shatan *Sent:* Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM *To:* David Cake <dave@davecake.net> <dave@davecake.net> *Cc:* leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann. org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the *droit de seigneur*, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Mike, You just said my opinion also, following the thread, will be grsteful to know, as here in the Gambia no laws exist and in West Africa am certain, so eager also to be enlightened by Jorge if they exist? Kind Regards Poncelet On 3 May 2018 at 17:06, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> wrote:
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
*Von:* Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com] *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 *An:* Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> *Cc:* Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; mmoll@ca.inter.net; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org *Betreff:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
*Von:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] *Im Auftrag von *Greg Shatan *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 *An:* Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> *Cc:* Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> *Betreff:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. *The Geo Case*: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa)
2. *The Non-Geo Case*: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
------------------------------
*From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM *To:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: *“…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”*
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
*From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Greg Shatan *Sent:* Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM *To:* David Cake <dave@davecake.net> <dave@davecake.net> *Cc:* leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the *droit de seigneur*, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
-- Poncelet O. Ileleji MBCS Coordinator The Gambia YMCAs Computer Training Centre & Digital Studio MDI Road Kanifing South P. O. Box 421 Banjul The Gambia, West Africa Tel: (220) 4370240 Fax:(220) 4390793 Cell:(220) 9912508 Skype: pons_utd *www.ymca.gm <http://www.ymca.gm>http://signaraglobalsolutions.com/ <http://signaraglobalsolutions.com/>http://jokkolabs.net/en/ <http://jokkolabs.net/en/>www.waigf.org <http://www.waigf.org>www,insistglobal.com <http://www.itag.gm>www.npoc.org <http://www.npoc.org>http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753 <http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753>*www.diplointernetgovernance.org
Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, mmoll@ca.inter.net < mmoll@ca.inter.net>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com< http://city.com>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
This seems to be very loose use of the ubiquitously undefined "public interest", as we so commonly see from governments. So Jorge, how do you define it? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, mmoll@ca.inter.net < mmoll@ca.inter.net>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> < mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com< http://city.com><http://city.com>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5- bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@ davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, mmoll@ca.inter.net < mmoll@ca.inter.net>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> < mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com< http://city.com><http://city.com>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5- bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@ davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
I agree with this, Liz. But we need to go further, and mandate that the GAC and Board not interfere in the objection process as they did with .GCC, cutting it off after it was fully briefed, because of GAC Advice to reject the application. Or as they did with .PersianGulf, .Islam and .halal, after we won the objection processes against governments, those governments continued to come back to scream at the Board, and have got their way thus far with the Board as the applications remain stalled. It has been a huge problem that ICANN has disregarded its own experts and documented policies, merely kowtowing to the whim of a few complaining governments in each of these cases (and probably others). Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 3:47 PM, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you *support* something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you *don’t* object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you *do object*, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector *must *use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, mmoll@ca.inter.net < mmoll@ca.inter.net>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com< http://city.com><http://city.com>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert < alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto: dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
All, I believe the request was made (by Jorge?) for examples of gTLD applications for strings with geographic meanings where there were issues (delays, difficulties with support/nonobjection letters, objections, negative GAC advice, etc.). Since Mike Rodenbaugh gave a couple of examples and I brought up a few examples, I've taken the liberty of starting a spreadsheet to collect these examples. The spreadsheet is at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jPa4jdBgo8P2aC6G4pzLoFTfyocIeon8qVD7... . The initial information is just based on my current recollection (except where it was extracted from Mike's email), so I'm sure it can be much improved. Please feel free to revise (in suggest mode), so that we can improve this resource. Thanks! Greg On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 7:10 PM, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> wrote:
I agree with this, Liz. But we need to go further, and mandate that the GAC and Board not interfere in the objection process as they did with .GCC, cutting it off after it was fully briefed, because of GAC Advice to reject the application. Or as they did with .PersianGulf, .Islam and .halal, after we won the objection processes against governments, those governments continued to come back to scream at the Board, and have got their way thus far with the Board as the applications remain stalled. It has been a huge problem that ICANN has disregarded its own experts and documented policies, merely kowtowing to the whim of a few complaining governments in each of these cases (and probably others).
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 3:47 PM, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you *support* something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you *don’t* object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you *do object*, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector *must *use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, mmoll@ca.inter.net < mmoll@ca.inter.net>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com< http://city.com><http://city.com>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-n ewgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert < alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto: dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-n ewgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mi ke@rodenbaugh.com>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> < mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com< http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> < mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsha tanipc@gmail.com>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com< http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<; http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5- bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:ale xander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@ davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net
<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@ davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:li z.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<; http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com because www.lucerne.com was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have *one* string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
*Von:* Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com] *Gesendet:* Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 *An:* Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> *Cc:* Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
*Betreff:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mi ke@rodenbaugh.com>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> < mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com< http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> < mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsha tanipc@gmail.com>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com< http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<; http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5- bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:ale xander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@ davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net
<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@ davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:li z.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<; http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
*Von:* Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com] *Gesendet:* Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 *An:* Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>
*Cc:* Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> *Betreff:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com because www.lucerne.com was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have *one* string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
*Von:* Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com] *Gesendet:* Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 *An:* Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> *Cc:* Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
*Betreff:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> < mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com< http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> < mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com< http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<; http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto: dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net
<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto: dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<; http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Greg They may have rights in a specific jurisdiction, regarding specific goods and services. They have no right on the name as such. Much less globally. Sandwich may be a hard case and perhaps it would make sense to ask the corresponding city governments what they think... But what do you think about Shanghai? Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 08:08 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org; liz.williams@auda.org.au Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Just for your information. The same protection that Jorge mentioned for Switzerland exists also in Italy for the geographic names. This is the sentence of the High court that stated on this matter. Cass. n. 16022/2000 In tema di marchi, per verificare se l'uso di un nome geografico possa ritenersi o meno indebito deve farsi riferimento non alla tutela riservata dalla legge ai diritti della personalità (art. 7 c.c.), bensì alla disciplina specifica che la legge riserva a tali «segni distintivi» nell'ambito del diritto commerciale, ossia quella dell'art. 21 della legge n. 929 del 1942 (la S.C. ha così confermato la sentenza che, nella controversia instaurata dal Comune di Capri contro una casa produttrice di sigarette, aveva escluso che l'utilizzo del marchio «Capri» potesse ledere la fama, il credito o il decoro della municipalità dell'isola). Usually it is the elected body (the mayor, the president of the regional council) of the corresponding name that could act in justice to protect the interest of the community it represents. The fact that such legislation doesn’t exist in the US, not necessarily means that doesn’t exist at all. Giacomo http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/denominazioni-geografiche-e-indicazioni-... From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: vendredi 4 mai 2018 08:13 To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg They may have rights in a specific jurisdiction, regarding specific goods and services. They have no right on the name as such. Much less globally. Sandwich may be a hard case and perhaps it would make sense to ask the corresponding city governments what they think... But what do you think about Shanghai? Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 08:08 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>; liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by the mailgateway **************************************************
For clarification, would the national laws referred to would only be applicable to an entity in that jurisdiction that applied for a city name, irrespective of whether it was intended for non-geo purpose (such as a generic word, brand or industry group) where the term has multiple uses? That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have the Sent from my iPhone On 4 May 2018, at 07:38, Mazzone, Giacomo <mazzone@ebu.ch<mailto:mazzone@ebu.ch>> wrote: Just for your information. The same protection that Jorge mentioned for Switzerland exists also in Italy for the geographic names. This is the sentence of the High court that stated on this matter. Cass. n. 16022/2000 In tema di marchi, per verificare se l'uso di un nome geografico possa ritenersi o meno indebito deve farsi riferimento non alla tutela riservata dalla legge ai diritti della personalità (art. 7 c.c.), bensì alla disciplina specifica che la legge riserva a tali «segni distintivi» nell'ambito del diritto commerciale, ossia quella dell'art. 21 della legge n. 929 del 1942 (la S.C. ha così confermato la sentenza che, nella controversia instaurata dal Comune di Capri contro una casa produttrice di sigarette, aveva escluso che l'utilizzo del marchio «Capri» potesse ledere la fama, il credito o il decoro della municipalità dell'isola). Usually it is the elected body (the mayor, the president of the regional council) of the corresponding name that could act in justice to protect the interest of the community it represents. The fact that such legislation doesn’t exist in the US, not necessarily means that doesn’t exist at all. Giacomo http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/denominazioni-geografiche-e-indicazioni-... From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: vendredi 4 mai 2018 08:13 To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg They may have rights in a specific jurisdiction, regarding specific goods and services. They have no right on the name as such. Much less globally. Sandwich may be a hard case and perhaps it would make sense to ask the corresponding city governments what they think... But what do you think about Shanghai? Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 08:08 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>; liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com><http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 ________________________________ ************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by the mailgateway ************************************************** _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Sorry for the message being cut short, here is the last piece: That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have an impact on an entity outside their jurisdiction that applies for the string, although could use the objection process if it had strong concerns with the application. Please correct if I have not stated this properly. Kind regards, Martin Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:09, Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> wrote:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have the
Hi Martin is that a legal assessment? As you know, the DNS is global, so a monopolization of say .luzern would have effects in Switzerland and beyond. The legal challenge would for sure affect the delegation of .luzern worldwide. ICANN is bound to respect applicable local law. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:14:41 MESZ An: Mazzone, Giacomo <mazzone@ebu.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Sorry for the message being cut short, here is the last piece: That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have an impact on an entity outside their jurisdiction that applies for the string, although could use the objection process if it had strong concerns with the application. Please correct if I have not stated this properly. Kind regards, Martin Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:09, Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> wrote:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have the
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Jorge, I am not a lawyer and I think many others in the WT are also non-lawyers, so I am trying to clarify the reach of the laws you have specified and understand this better. Kind regards, Martin Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:18, "Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch" <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Hi Martin
is that a legal assessment?
As you know, the DNS is global, so a monopolization of say .luzern would have effects in Switzerland and beyond.
The legal challenge would for sure affect the delegation of .luzern worldwide.
ICANN is bound to respect applicable local law.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:14:41 MESZ An: Mazzone, Giacomo <mazzone@ebu.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Sorry for the message being cut short, here is the last piece:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have an impact on an entity outside their jurisdiction that applies for the string, although could use the objection process if it had strong concerns with the application.
Please correct if I have not stated this properly.
Kind regards,
Martin
Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:09, Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> wrote:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have the
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Thanks. It seemed your question led in a very specific direction... but I may have misunderstood. Hope that my feedback clarifies things. I guess we all are aware that national/regional laws have an impact on ICANN and need to be respected insofar they are applicable. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:24:48 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: mazzone@ebu.ch <mazzone@ebu.ch>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, I am not a lawyer and I think many others in the WT are also non-lawyers, so I am trying to clarify the reach of the laws you have specified and understand this better. Kind regards, Martin Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:18, "Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch" <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Hi Martin
is that a legal assessment?
As you know, the DNS is global, so a monopolization of say .luzern would have effects in Switzerland and beyond.
The legal challenge would for sure affect the delegation of .luzern worldwide.
ICANN is bound to respect applicable local law.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:14:41 MESZ An: Mazzone, Giacomo <mazzone@ebu.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Sorry for the message being cut short, here is the last piece:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have an impact on an entity outside their jurisdiction that applies for the string, although could use the objection process if it had strong concerns with the application.
Please correct if I have not stated this properly.
Kind regards,
Martin
Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:09, Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> wrote:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have the
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Ok just to add a few points to this very interesting thread which I think it's worth making here. 1. In relation to certain terms - which in the AGB2012 terms would have been classed as geo names - certainly in UK law and jurisdiction there are quite a few restrictions on use. To be clear I am not commenting on whether these are good rules (some are frankly bizarre) but for right or wrong they are part of the laws of the UK. For example, there are a whole raft of regulations governing what can or can't be a company name - see https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/incorporation-and-names for the full set of rules, but basically you need a letter of non-objection in a number of situations where you are effectively representing yourself as associated with a region, government department or regulated profession. The laws in the UK regarding business names basically disapprove using a name or term which denotes (or might be confused with or denote) an official authority or body when there is no connection to that body in fact. (Interestingly these rules also catch terms such as 'intellectual property' and 'registrar'). 2. Whilst in the UK we are like the US I think in that we don't have any particular restrictions on the use of city names, I hear from my European legal colleagues and friends that this is very different in continental Europe where most if not all of the countries are very protective of place names in general and cities in particular. But when it comes to questions of public policy I well recall that Nominet's first brush with our legislators as a private company was in relation to governance and naming policy as a result of some 30,000 names of cities and towns being registered by one particular registrant and then being offered on a lease basis to the local authorities to those cities and towns. So it is definitely an area where some caution needs to be exercised as a question of good policy recommendations (which is what we are concerned with here) and I'm not sure it helps to be too strictly legalistic about it. 3. The nature of a trade mark, denoting the origin of certain goods and services vs those of another person, is a specific right in a specific jurisdiction for specific goods and services to legally stop another person from imitating your mark or confusing your customers; fundamentally it is about consumer protection and prevention of imitations. The nature of the right is also a negative right ie to stop others from doing certain things, rather than being an entitlement. Within those trade mark rules there are also restrictions about what can and cannot be obtained as a trade mark. For example our own application to trade mark a logo for .UK was refused under rules which prohibit registration of a trade mark which may indicate a geographical origin. You also can't register a mark which is simply too descriptive or non-distinctive. There's quite a helpful summary here: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/unacceptable-trade-marks . 4. I am not saying that the rules on registration of company and business names, or trade mark registration, translate perfectly to the new TLD programme. But when we look at the letters of non-objection process for capital cities, it didn't seem to me to be unreasonable to require a letter of non-objection. (But then I had done it before, when I incorporated Nominet Registrar Services Limited, so I was familiar with the concept at least.) For example for .London the responsible body was the officer of the elected Mayor of London, similarly for the Wales domain we had to go through a selection process with the Welsh Assembly before we were allowed to have the right piece of paper in order to submit our application for the new gTLD. I agree that dealing with those bodies was at times frustrating and added complexity to the application process; but on the plus side the result was that there was only one applicant and with the leg work done up front they proceeded to delegation relatively quickly and smoothly. 5. I know these are difficult issues, and I agree with much that has been said about the role of the GAC - the 'A' stands for 'advisory', right? Certainly the small number of anomalous outcomes from 2012 need assessment to work out whether the rules need to be improved. But in the absence of easy answers when I look back at the relative success of the 2012 round for capitals and cities - see .tokyo, .london, .paris, .berlin, .amsterdam, .nyc, .hamburg, .koeln, .boston, .vegas, .moscow, .wien, .miami. .istanbul, .sydney, .quebec, etc etc and also some IDNs I think overall there have been some great outcomes for the new gTLDs programme in terms of geographical, cultural and linguistic diversity, and we should celebrate those successes and not be too hasty to completely rewrite those rules. Particularly when those rules were a compromise result after of years of policy discussions, and as is apparent from this thread it seems that consensus for something else is rather remote. Best wishes Nick -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: 04 May 2018 08:30 To: martin@brandregistrygroup.org Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Thanks. It seemed your question led in a very specific direction... but I may have misunderstood. Hope that my feedback clarifies things. I guess we all are aware that national/regional laws have an impact on ICANN and need to be respected insofar they are applicable. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:24:48 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: mazzone@ebu.ch <mazzone@ebu.ch>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, I am not a lawyer and I think many others in the WT are also non-lawyers, so I am trying to clarify the reach of the laws you have specified and understand this better. Kind regards, Martin Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:18, "Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch" <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Hi Martin
is that a legal assessment?
As you know, the DNS is global, so a monopolization of say .luzern would have effects in Switzerland and beyond.
The legal challenge would for sure affect the delegation of .luzern worldwide.
ICANN is bound to respect applicable local law.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:14:41 MESZ An: Mazzone, Giacomo <mazzone@ebu.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Sorry for the message being cut short, here is the last piece:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have an impact on an entity outside their jurisdiction that applies for the string, although could use the objection process if it had strong concerns with the application.
Please correct if I have not stated this properly.
Kind regards,
Martin
Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:09, Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> wrote:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have the
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
All, Thank you for this very active, interesting and constructive thread. A question to anyone willing to tackle it (and I hope it doesn’t have a chilling effect on this great conversation!) - Here goes: How could a future policy and AGB deal with the following scenario: A substate people or indigenous community, say the Kurds, applies for a string that depicts a string which they historically claim “as theirs” (.Kurdistan), a string whose very existence would probably be denied by the relevant constituted sovereign authorities since its recognition would help validate the self-determination claim of that sub-state people (and the relevant constituted sovereign state strongly objects to the application). I think this would fall on the category of “geonames not included in AGB”. I suspect there would be less contentious cases than .Kurdistan, but I use a potentially highly adversative hypothetical for argument’s sake, as a type of “stress test”. Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 4, 2018, at 3:29 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Thanks. It seemed your question led in a very specific direction... but I may have misunderstood.
Hope that my feedback clarifies things. I guess we all are aware that national/regional laws have an impact on ICANN and need to be respected insofar they are applicable.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:24:48 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: mazzone@ebu.ch <mazzone@ebu.ch>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge,
I am not a lawyer and I think many others in the WT are also non-lawyers, so I am trying to clarify the reach of the laws you have specified and understand this better.
Kind regards,
Martin
Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:18, "Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch" <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Hi Martin
is that a legal assessment?
As you know, the DNS is global, so a monopolization of say .luzern would have effects in Switzerland and beyond.
The legal challenge would for sure affect the delegation of .luzern worldwide.
ICANN is bound to respect applicable local law.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:14:41 MESZ An: Mazzone, Giacomo <mazzone@ebu.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Sorry for the message being cut short, here is the last piece:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have an impact on an entity outside their jurisdiction that applies for the string, although could use the objection process if it had strong concerns with the application.
Please correct if I have not stated this properly.
Kind regards,
Martin
Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:09, Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> wrote:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have the
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Javier, An extremely similar scenario has happened with .PersianGulf already. Anyone can read up on that situation via the IRP briefing <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/gcc-v-icann-2014-12-06-en> and the most recent, resulting Board resolution <https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2018-03-15-en#2.b>. Essentially, and frankly quite ridiculously, Arab countries don't want that TLD to exist because they call that body of water the Arabian Gulf. [Of course, they could apply to operate the .ArabianGulf TLD....] My client was the only applicant for the TLD, and prevailed in the Arab governments' silly Objection against the application. Thus they should have been awarded the TLD and ICANN was poised to issue the contract. But, the Arab governments persisted, bringing an IRP against ICANN. Incredibly, in by far the most ridiculous IRP decision in ICANN's brief history, ICANN lost that IRP. More incredibly, even though my client was not a party to that IRP, the foolish IRP panel ordered ICANN to terminate my client's application. Perhaps even more incredibly, but rightfully, ICANN has refused to adopt that recommendation. Currently ICANN is deciding what to do with the application..., treating the Arab governments objection as non-consensus GAC Advice, even though the GAC did not issue any such advice. Thus, it is a huge, ridiculous mess, and seems unlikely to conclude any time soon. Best, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 4:21 AM, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
All,
Thank you for this very active, interesting and constructive thread.
A question to anyone willing to tackle it (and I hope it doesn’t have a chilling effect on this great conversation!) - Here goes:
How could a future policy and AGB deal with the following scenario:
A substate people or indigenous community, say the Kurds, applies for a string that depicts a string which they historically claim “as theirs” (.Kurdistan), a string whose very existence would probably be denied by the relevant constituted sovereign authorities since its recognition would help validate the self-determination claim of that sub-state people (and the relevant constituted sovereign state strongly objects to the application). I think this would fall on the category of “geonames not included in AGB”.
I suspect there would be less contentious cases than .Kurdistan, but I use a potentially highly adversative hypothetical for argument’s sake, as a type of “stress test”.
Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 4, 2018, at 3:29 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> < Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Thanks. It seemed your question led in a very specific direction... but I may have misunderstood.
Hope that my feedback clarifies things. I guess we all are aware that national/regional laws have an impact on ICANN and need to be respected insofar they are applicable.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:24:48 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: mazzone@ebu.ch <mazzone@ebu.ch>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge,
I am not a lawyer and I think many others in the WT are also non-lawyers, so I am trying to clarify the reach of the laws you have specified and understand this better.
Kind regards,
Martin
Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:18, "Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch" < Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Hi Martin
is that a legal assessment?
As you know, the DNS is global, so a monopolization of say .luzern would have effects in Switzerland and beyond.
The legal challenge would for sure affect the delegation of .luzern worldwide.
ICANN is bound to respect applicable local law.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org>
Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:14:41 MESZ
An: Mazzone, Giacomo <mazzone@ebu.ch>
Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Sorry for the message being cut short, here is the last piece:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have an impact on an entity outside their jurisdiction that applies for the string, although could use the objection process if it had strong concerns with the application.
Please correct if I have not stated this properly.
Kind regards,
Martin
Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:09, Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> wrote:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have the
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Thanks Mike, But I wonder if your example is completely analogous. My example presupposes an application by a “national community”, that is clearly non sovereign, but with “state-like” interests and presumably a local governance body which might or might not be recognized. Should or could a national or linguistic minority, or indigenous group that is dully constituted be able to apply for a potentially “nationally” contentious string, perhaps with a decent chance of success, even if the sovereign state within which it exists opposes such application? Regards, Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 4, 2018, at 11:18 AM, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> wrote:
Javier,
An extremely similar scenario has happened with .PersianGulf already. Anyone can read up on that situation via the IRP briefing and the most recent, resulting Board resolution. Essentially, and frankly quite ridiculously, Arab countries don't want that TLD to exist because they call that body of water the Arabian Gulf. [Of course, they could apply to operate the .ArabianGulf TLD....] My client was the only applicant for the TLD, and prevailed in the Arab governments' silly Objection against the application. Thus they should have been awarded the TLD and ICANN was poised to issue the contract.
But, the Arab governments persisted, bringing an IRP against ICANN. Incredibly, in by far the most ridiculous IRP decision in ICANN's brief history, ICANN lost that IRP. More incredibly, even though my client was not a party to that IRP, the foolish IRP panel ordered ICANN to terminate my client's application. Perhaps even more incredibly, but rightfully, ICANN has refused to adopt that recommendation. Currently ICANN is deciding what to do with the application..., treating the Arab governments objection as non-consensus GAC Advice, even though the GAC did not issue any such advice.
Thus, it is a huge, ridiculous mess, and seems unlikely to conclude any time soon.
Best, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 4:21 AM, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote: All,
Thank you for this very active, interesting and constructive thread.
A question to anyone willing to tackle it (and I hope it doesn’t have a chilling effect on this great conversation!) - Here goes:
How could a future policy and AGB deal with the following scenario:
A substate people or indigenous community, say the Kurds, applies for a string that depicts a string which they historically claim “as theirs” (.Kurdistan), a string whose very existence would probably be denied by the relevant constituted sovereign authorities since its recognition would help validate the self-determination claim of that sub-state people (and the relevant constituted sovereign state strongly objects to the application). I think this would fall on the category of “geonames not included in AGB”.
I suspect there would be less contentious cases than .Kurdistan, but I use a potentially highly adversative hypothetical for argument’s sake, as a type of “stress test”.
Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 4, 2018, at 3:29 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Thanks. It seemed your question led in a very specific direction... but I may have misunderstood.
Hope that my feedback clarifies things. I guess we all are aware that national/regional laws have an impact on ICANN and need to be respected insofar they are applicable.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:24:48 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: mazzone@ebu.ch <mazzone@ebu.ch>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge,
I am not a lawyer and I think many others in the WT are also non-lawyers, so I am trying to clarify the reach of the laws you have specified and understand this better.
Kind regards,
Martin
Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:18, "Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch" <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Hi Martin
is that a legal assessment?
As you know, the DNS is global, so a monopolization of say .luzern would have effects in Switzerland and beyond.
The legal challenge would for sure affect the delegation of .luzern worldwide.
ICANN is bound to respect applicable local law.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:14:41 MESZ An: Mazzone, Giacomo <mazzone@ebu.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Sorry for the message being cut short, here is the last piece:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have an impact on an entity outside their jurisdiction that applies for the string, although could use the objection process if it had strong concerns with the application.
Please correct if I have not stated this properly.
Kind regards,
Martin
Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:09, Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> wrote:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have the
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
I would answer that question with a loud YES. Indeed it was one of the primary goals of all the "community" discussions and policy development leading up to the AGB and 2012 round. We frequently used Zulu as an example for many years, and Avri has a list of others. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 8:47 AM, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks Mike,
But I wonder if your example is completely analogous. My example presupposes an application by a “national community”, that is clearly non sovereign, but with “state-like” interests and presumably a local governance body which might or might not be recognized. Should or could a national or linguistic minority, or indigenous group that is dully constituted be able to apply for a potentially “nationally” contentious string, perhaps with a decent chance of success, even if the sovereign state within which it exists opposes such application?
Regards,
Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 4, 2018, at 11:18 AM, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> wrote:
Javier,
An extremely similar scenario has happened with .PersianGulf already. Anyone can read up on that situation via the IRP briefing <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/gcc-v-icann-2014-12-06-en> and the most recent, resulting Board resolution <https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2018-03-15-en#2.b>. Essentially, and frankly quite ridiculously, Arab countries don't want that TLD to exist because they call that body of water the Arabian Gulf. [Of course, they could apply to operate the .ArabianGulf TLD....] My client was the only applicant for the TLD, and prevailed in the Arab governments' silly Objection against the application. Thus they should have been awarded the TLD and ICANN was poised to issue the contract.
But, the Arab governments persisted, bringing an IRP against ICANN. Incredibly, in by far the most ridiculous IRP decision in ICANN's brief history, ICANN lost that IRP. More incredibly, even though my client was not a party to that IRP, the foolish IRP panel ordered ICANN to terminate my client's application. Perhaps even more incredibly, but rightfully, ICANN has refused to adopt that recommendation. Currently ICANN is deciding what to do with the application..., treating the Arab governments objection as non-consensus GAC Advice, even though the GAC did not issue any such advice.
Thus, it is a huge, ridiculous mess, and seems unlikely to conclude any time soon.
Best, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 4:21 AM, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
All,
Thank you for this very active, interesting and constructive thread.
A question to anyone willing to tackle it (and I hope it doesn’t have a chilling effect on this great conversation!) - Here goes:
How could a future policy and AGB deal with the following scenario:
A substate people or indigenous community, say the Kurds, applies for a string that depicts a string which they historically claim “as theirs” (.Kurdistan), a string whose very existence would probably be denied by the relevant constituted sovereign authorities since its recognition would help validate the self-determination claim of that sub-state people (and the relevant constituted sovereign state strongly objects to the application). I think this would fall on the category of “geonames not included in AGB”.
I suspect there would be less contentious cases than .Kurdistan, but I use a potentially highly adversative hypothetical for argument’s sake, as a type of “stress test”.
Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 4, 2018, at 3:29 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> < Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Thanks. It seemed your question led in a very specific direction... but I may have misunderstood.
Hope that my feedback clarifies things. I guess we all are aware that national/regional laws have an impact on ICANN and need to be respected insofar they are applicable.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:24:48 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: mazzone@ebu.ch <mazzone@ebu.ch>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge,
I am not a lawyer and I think many others in the WT are also non-lawyers, so I am trying to clarify the reach of the laws you have specified and understand this better.
Kind regards,
Martin
Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:18, "Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch" < Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Hi Martin
is that a legal assessment?
As you know, the DNS is global, so a monopolization of say .luzern would have effects in Switzerland and beyond.
The legal challenge would for sure affect the delegation of .luzern worldwide.
ICANN is bound to respect applicable local law.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org>
Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:14:41 MESZ
An: Mazzone, Giacomo <mazzone@ebu.ch>
Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Sorry for the message being cut short, here is the last piece:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have an impact on an entity outside their jurisdiction that applies for the string, although could use the objection process if it had strong concerns with the application.
Please correct if I have not stated this properly.
Kind regards,
Martin
Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:09, Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> wrote:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have the
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Thanks Mike, Interesting! Does anybody else want to chime in this discussion, this possible “Community gTLD” way forward for some geographic TLDs? Regards, Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 4, 2018, at 12:03 PM, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> wrote:
I would answer that question with a loud YES. Indeed it was one of the primary goals of all the "community" discussions and policy development leading up to the AGB and 2012 round. We frequently used Zulu as an example for many years, and Avri has a list of others.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 8:47 AM, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote: Thanks Mike,
But I wonder if your example is completely analogous. My example presupposes an application by a “national community”, that is clearly non sovereign, but with “state-like” interests and presumably a local governance body which might or might not be recognized. Should or could a national or linguistic minority, or indigenous group that is dully constituted be able to apply for a potentially “nationally” contentious string, perhaps with a decent chance of success, even if the sovereign state within which it exists opposes such application?
Regards,
Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 4, 2018, at 11:18 AM, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> wrote:
Javier,
An extremely similar scenario has happened with .PersianGulf already. Anyone can read up on that situation via the IRP briefing and the most recent, resulting Board resolution. Essentially, and frankly quite ridiculously, Arab countries don't want that TLD to exist because they call that body of water the Arabian Gulf. [Of course, they could apply to operate the .ArabianGulf TLD....] My client was the only applicant for the TLD, and prevailed in the Arab governments' silly Objection against the application. Thus they should have been awarded the TLD and ICANN was poised to issue the contract.
But, the Arab governments persisted, bringing an IRP against ICANN. Incredibly, in by far the most ridiculous IRP decision in ICANN's brief history, ICANN lost that IRP. More incredibly, even though my client was not a party to that IRP, the foolish IRP panel ordered ICANN to terminate my client's application. Perhaps even more incredibly, but rightfully, ICANN has refused to adopt that recommendation. Currently ICANN is deciding what to do with the application..., treating the Arab governments objection as non-consensus GAC Advice, even though the GAC did not issue any such advice.
Thus, it is a huge, ridiculous mess, and seems unlikely to conclude any time soon.
Best, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 4:21 AM, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote: All,
Thank you for this very active, interesting and constructive thread.
A question to anyone willing to tackle it (and I hope it doesn’t have a chilling effect on this great conversation!) - Here goes:
How could a future policy and AGB deal with the following scenario:
A substate people or indigenous community, say the Kurds, applies for a string that depicts a string which they historically claim “as theirs” (.Kurdistan), a string whose very existence would probably be denied by the relevant constituted sovereign authorities since its recognition would help validate the self-determination claim of that sub-state people (and the relevant constituted sovereign state strongly objects to the application). I think this would fall on the category of “geonames not included in AGB”.
I suspect there would be less contentious cases than .Kurdistan, but I use a potentially highly adversative hypothetical for argument’s sake, as a type of “stress test”.
Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 4, 2018, at 3:29 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Thanks. It seemed your question led in a very specific direction... but I may have misunderstood.
Hope that my feedback clarifies things. I guess we all are aware that national/regional laws have an impact on ICANN and need to be respected insofar they are applicable.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:24:48 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: mazzone@ebu.ch <mazzone@ebu.ch>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge,
I am not a lawyer and I think many others in the WT are also non-lawyers, so I am trying to clarify the reach of the laws you have specified and understand this better.
Kind regards,
Martin
Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:18, "Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch" <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Hi Martin
is that a legal assessment?
As you know, the DNS is global, so a monopolization of say .luzern would have effects in Switzerland and beyond.
The legal challenge would for sure affect the delegation of .luzern worldwide.
ICANN is bound to respect applicable local law.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:14:41 MESZ An: Mazzone, Giacomo <mazzone@ebu.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Sorry for the message being cut short, here is the last piece:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have an impact on an entity outside their jurisdiction that applies for the string, although could use the objection process if it had strong concerns with the application.
Please correct if I have not stated this properly.
Kind regards,
Martin
Sent from my iPhone
> On 4 May 2018, at 08:09, Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> wrote: > > That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have the _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Javier, i have commented before on this Mike-Javier VERY interesting side track. I think that there is a lot to learn, and to save and maybe slightly improve in the (a) applications and (b) evaluations of the City applications in the last round. But I'm afraid that (c) the decision making process is either fatally flawed in the last round and/or for the case of new GeoCommunities ishould be moved to a different instance than the post-transition new-private ICANN..... Apart from the process view as per above, which seems to be the only leitmotiv so far in the WT-5, i would like to add that in the end, the major risk I see against an "open, globally connected, trusted and secure' internet from this discussion, is that we keep adding restrictions in the use of TLDs. Restrictions in applications, restrictions in evaluations, but over all, _RESTRICTIONS IN USE (INTENDED OR ACTUAL) OF TLDS_ may be very very dangerous for the internets health. By the way, i'm no lawyer in case somebody had failed to notice. --- Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- mQENBFqh7xwBCAC7PBUUek72U8teLrAieWI+JBo/nz0rQObzKgzGNWm2bb+i90mD roNsrvwDJiGOsB/VAhJy6ilIhs++QrxhVEzMz6oKJa8ANaNNvnK2Z8heYm1aC97E qY6y1z853b6F3XrN8262dor9NZEqaK28NVwLsFTfkGKhb4f3rJlCDmhwxt5VHhBQ MHKGxyutq0fyJpG6QpoAoRLaYXrq+xjXARhN9JBjeRRzbjnBbWt7+lRdCrZdOxfD ivRut9F2zMJq8RmeI5goTcq03IRLtKf41A6Np5K//HLe7GlHWH9g4pSKF+UB+EMe S506TxI0dVbyT3jlTnhhfNA/bpQXHcdCZ5EhABEBAAG0F2Nhcmxvc3JhdWxAZ3V0 aWVycmV6LnNliQEcBBABAgAGBQJaoe8cAAoJEOkK/VKjr2tvztgH/1zInwNszd4w 21UilxVmXX2J1SPZG6xXwbwU5BukIm7iBVYwxxPlIAZdJbG0/QynK2oWU1e1Zjed vBemfJtjOn2yRWo3P13PUV/2/trHWgUk5bA3eIUbWDW5fQRLW+TaHC7TuRKgRaJC NgdBItEniQz7DakGzld3PWmsTvIWd4N/fqzATD3DOZmONF52lyVuAEvKoF4rMRTR emvCrL66xEu19u9+Urk7R+DQuFQMNuX0MqC6/vIsmXYZPH7jnV6ZDyzb0BUnjYcx 6MH/YwJx29yjA4iN1NpwCpy1hc+YP1oavz2t+6isM6wB0mXlAazw2d83zwypsH6C 8xgjuRFm9xQ= =RX04 -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- El 2018-05-04 10:17, Javier Rua escribió:
Thanks Mike,
Interesting!
Does anybody else want to chime in this discussion, this possible "Community gTLD" way forward for some geographic TLDs?
Regards,
Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 4, 2018, at 12:03 PM, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> wrote:
I would answer that question with a loud YES. Indeed it was one of the primary goals of all the "community" discussions and policy development leading up to the AGB and 2012 round. We frequently used Zulu as an example for many years, and Avri has a list of others.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 8:47 AM, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks Mike,
But I wonder if your example is completely analogous. My example presupposes an application by a "national community", that is clearly non sovereign, but with "state-like" interests and presumably a local governance body which might or might not be recognized. Should or could a national or linguistic minority, or indigenous group that is dully constituted be able to apply for a potentially "nationally" contentious string, perhaps with a decent chance of success, even if the sovereign state within which it exists opposes such application?
Regards,
Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua [1]
On May 4, 2018, at 11:18 AM, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com> wrote:
Javier,
An extremely similar scenario has happened with .PersianGulf already. Anyone can read up on that situation via the IRP briefing [2] and the most recent, resulting Board resolution [3]. Essentially, and frankly quite ridiculously, Arab countries don't want that TLD to exist because they call that body of water the Arabian Gulf. [Of course, they could apply to operate the .ArabianGulf TLD....] My client was the only applicant for the TLD, and prevailed in the Arab governments' silly Objection against the application. Thus they should have been awarded the TLD and ICANN was poised to issue the contract.
But, the Arab governments persisted, bringing an IRP against ICANN. Incredibly, in by far the most ridiculous IRP decision in ICANN's brief history, ICANN lost that IRP. More incredibly, even though my client was not a party to that IRP, the foolish IRP panel ordered ICANN to terminate my client's application. Perhaps even more incredibly, but rightfully, ICANN has refused to adopt that recommendation. Currently ICANN is deciding what to do with the application..., treating the Arab governments objection as non-consensus GAC Advice, even though the GAC did not issue any such advice.
Thus, it is a huge, ridiculous mess, and seems unlikely to conclude any time soon.
Best, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 4:21 AM, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
All,
Thank you for this very active, interesting and constructive thread.
A question to anyone willing to tackle it (and I hope it doesn't have a chilling effect on this great conversation!) - Here goes:
How could a future policy and AGB deal with the following scenario:
A substate people or indigenous community, say the Kurds, applies for a string that depicts a string which they historically claim "as theirs" (.Kurdistan), a string whose very existence would probably be denied by the relevant constituted sovereign authorities since its recognition would help validate the self-determination claim of that sub-state people (and the relevant constituted sovereign state strongly objects to the application). I think this would fall on the category of "geonames not included in AGB".
I suspect there would be less contentious cases than .Kurdistan, but I use a potentially highly adversative hypothetical for argument's sake, as a type of "stress test".
Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua [1]
On May 4, 2018, at 3:29 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Thanks. It seemed your question led in a very specific direction... but I may have misunderstood.
Hope that my feedback clarifies things. I guess we all are aware that national/regional laws have an impact on ICANN and need to be respected insofar they are applicable.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:24:48 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: mazzone@ebu.ch <mazzone@ebu.ch>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge,
I am not a lawyer and I think many others in the WT are also non-lawyers, so I am trying to clarify the reach of the laws you have specified and understand this better.
Kind regards,
Martin
Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:18, "Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch" <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote: Hi Martin is that a legal assessment? As you know, the DNS is global, so a monopolization of say .luzern would have effects in Switzerland and beyond. The legal challenge would for sure affect the delegation of .luzern worldwide. ICANN is bound to respect applicable local law. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:14:41 MESZ An: Mazzone, Giacomo <mazzone@ebu.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Sorry for the message being cut short, here is the last piece: That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have an impact on an entity outside their jurisdiction that applies for the string, although could use the objection process if it had strong concerns with the application. Please correct if I have not stated this properly. Kind regards, Martin Sent from my iPhone On 4 May 2018, at 08:09, Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> wrote:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have the
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [4]
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [4] _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [4] _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 Links: ------ [1] https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua [2] https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/gcc-v-icann-2014-12-06-en [3] https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2018-03-15-en#2.b [4] https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Mike, Javier, based on your new example if ICANN's application, evaluation and delegation process can't solve this I can see only two options based on this thread: #1 Use only the {application} and {evaluation} sections, and move the delegation decisions somewhere else where local laws and traditions are looked at under a different perspective #2 Go somewhere else where GeoCommunities get "gifts", like the ccTLDs did decades ago But maybe other people see more options --- Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- mQENBFqh7xwBCAC7PBUUek72U8teLrAieWI+JBo/nz0rQObzKgzGNWm2bb+i90mD roNsrvwDJiGOsB/VAhJy6ilIhs++QrxhVEzMz6oKJa8ANaNNvnK2Z8heYm1aC97E qY6y1z853b6F3XrN8262dor9NZEqaK28NVwLsFTfkGKhb4f3rJlCDmhwxt5VHhBQ MHKGxyutq0fyJpG6QpoAoRLaYXrq+xjXARhN9JBjeRRzbjnBbWt7+lRdCrZdOxfD ivRut9F2zMJq8RmeI5goTcq03IRLtKf41A6Np5K//HLe7GlHWH9g4pSKF+UB+EMe S506TxI0dVbyT3jlTnhhfNA/bpQXHcdCZ5EhABEBAAG0F2Nhcmxvc3JhdWxAZ3V0 aWVycmV6LnNliQEcBBABAgAGBQJaoe8cAAoJEOkK/VKjr2tvztgH/1zInwNszd4w 21UilxVmXX2J1SPZG6xXwbwU5BukIm7iBVYwxxPlIAZdJbG0/QynK2oWU1e1Zjed vBemfJtjOn2yRWo3P13PUV/2/trHWgUk5bA3eIUbWDW5fQRLW+TaHC7TuRKgRaJC NgdBItEniQz7DakGzld3PWmsTvIWd4N/fqzATD3DOZmONF52lyVuAEvKoF4rMRTR emvCrL66xEu19u9+Urk7R+DQuFQMNuX0MqC6/vIsmXYZPH7jnV6ZDyzb0BUnjYcx 6MH/YwJx29yjA4iN1NpwCpy1hc+YP1oavz2t+6isM6wB0mXlAazw2d83zwypsH6C 8xgjuRFm9xQ= =RX04 -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- El 2018-05-04 09:18, Mike Rodenbaugh escribió:
Javier,
An extremely similar scenario has happened with .PersianGulf already. Anyone can read up on that situation via the IRP briefing [1] and the most recent, resulting Board resolution [2]. Essentially, and frankly quite ridiculously, Arab countries don't want that TLD to exist because they call that body of water the Arabian Gulf. [Of course, they could apply to operate the .ArabianGulf TLD....] My client was the only applicant for the TLD, and prevailed in the Arab governments' silly Objection against the application. Thus they should have been awarded the TLD and ICANN was poised to issue the contract.
But, the Arab governments persisted, bringing an IRP against ICANN. Incredibly, in by far the most ridiculous IRP decision in ICANN's brief history, ICANN lost that IRP. More incredibly, even though my client was not a party to that IRP, the foolish IRP panel ordered ICANN to terminate my client's application. Perhaps even more incredibly, but rightfully, ICANN has refused to adopt that recommendation. Currently ICANN is deciding what to do with the application..., treating the Arab governments objection as non-consensus GAC Advice, even though the GAC did not issue any such advice.
Thus, it is a huge, ridiculous mess, and seems unlikely to conclude any time soon.
Best, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 4:21 AM, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
All,
Thank you for this very active, interesting and constructive thread.
A question to anyone willing to tackle it (and I hope it doesn't have a chilling effect on this great conversation!) - Here goes:
How could a future policy and AGB deal with the following scenario:
A substate people or indigenous community, say the Kurds, applies for a string that depicts a string which they historically claim "as theirs" (.Kurdistan), a string whose very existence would probably be denied by the relevant constituted sovereign authorities since its recognition would help validate the self-determination claim of that sub-state people (and the relevant constituted sovereign state strongly objects to the application). I think this would fall on the category of "geonames not included in AGB".
I suspect there would be less contentious cases than .Kurdistan, but I use a potentially highly adversative hypothetical for argument's sake, as a type of "stress test".
Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua [3]
On May 4, 2018, at 3:29 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Thanks. It seemed your question led in a very specific direction... but I may have misunderstood.
Hope that my feedback clarifies things. I guess we all are aware that national/regional laws have an impact on ICANN and need to be respected insofar they are applicable.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:24:48 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: mazzone@ebu.ch <mazzone@ebu.ch>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge,
I am not a lawyer and I think many others in the WT are also non-lawyers, so I am trying to clarify the reach of the laws you have specified and understand this better.
Kind regards,
Martin
Sent from my iPhone
On 4 May 2018, at 08:18, "Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch" <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote: Hi Martin is that a legal assessment? As you know, the DNS is global, so a monopolization of say .luzern would have effects in Switzerland and beyond. The legal challenge would for sure affect the delegation of .luzern worldwide. ICANN is bound to respect applicable local law. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 09:14:41 MESZ An: Mazzone, Giacomo <mazzone@ebu.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Sorry for the message being cut short, here is the last piece: That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have an impact on an entity outside their jurisdiction that applies for the string, although could use the objection process if it had strong concerns with the application. Please correct if I have not stated this properly. Kind regards, Martin Sent from my iPhone On 4 May 2018, at 08:09, Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org> wrote:
That would seem to provide the National government the ability to have control over if/who/how a geo TLD could be operated by a local entity. It would not, however, have the
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [4]
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [4] _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [4] _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 Links: ------ [1] https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/gcc-v-icann-2014-12-06-en [2] https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2018-03-15-en#2.b [3] https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua [4] https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
On 4 May 2018, at 2:12 pm, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch wrote:
Dear Greg
They may have rights in a specific jurisdiction, regarding specific goods and services. They have no right on the name as such. Much less globally.
Jorge, isn’t your argument that rights in a specific jurisdiction, such as a municipality in Switzerland in Swiss law, do give them some global rights? I think that claim is weaker than trademark law, which has at least strong international agreements about trademark recognition. David
Dear David ICANN has to act in conformity with applicable local law according to its Bylaws. Brand rights are also basically local, but of a limited nature - to products/services in a specific category with the goal to avoid consumer confusion. There might eg exist hundreds of „lucerne foods“ in each country... in Switzerland there may be many such names with „lucerne“ as a part of their name. But political communities with that exact name are more rare. And their rights on the name „as such“ are (in Switzerland and other countries) of a broad nature under civil right, as I have explained before. They are not limited to one specific category etc., not limited to commerce, not limited to avoid consumer confusion. Which is all logical as here what is at stake is not a commercial identifier but the identification of a political entity, with historic, social, economic, cultural aspects. The DNS is global (and we want to keep it so). If one TLD is called „lucerne“ the laws on that name in Switzerland would apply... Hope that these repeated explanations are clear to everyone by now. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: David Cake <dave@davecake.net> Datum: 8. Mai 2018 um 04:57:15 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names On 4 May 2018, at 2:12 pm, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote: Dear Greg They may have rights in a specific jurisdiction, regarding specific goods and services. They have no right on the name as such. Much less globally. Jorge, isn’t your argument that rights in a specific jurisdiction, such as a municipality in Switzerland in Swiss law, do give them some global rights? I think that claim is weaker than trademark law, which has at least strong international agreements about trademark recognition. David
Jorge, Your explanation here does not accurately depict trademark law, to the detriment of trademark owners and consumers alike. I don't have the time to critique every sentence, but here are a few points. It is highly unlikely that there would be even a few "Lucerne Foods" in a given country; more likely there would be only one. Trademark registrations are, at the least, national in nature (not merely "local"), and a trademark registration for Lucerne Foods (or for "Lucerne" for food products) would almost certainly prevent any other entity from using or registering that mark in that country. "Common-law" (unregistered) trademarks may be more limited geographically, but under US law, a trademark registration confers "nationwide constructive use" on its owner. Also, as explained before, while a trademark registration is issued for a specific classes of goods and services (or subsets of those classes), the rights prevent use of the same or similar mark for the listed goods and services and any "related" goods and services. Your explanation also ignores the fact that many brandowners have registrations in multiple classes and in multiple countries. It's not uncommon for a trademark to be registered in 60, 70 or even many more countries. Similarly, it's not uncommon for a brandowner to have registrations in 5 or 10 (or even 15-20 or more) of the 45 classes of goods and services. I understand why you want to minimize trademark rights in this discussion, but your depiction is not accurate. I don't think "rarity" is necessarily germane here, and you confer "rarity" based on a flawed premise. But if we do think there's something to be said for "rarity," there will be many times this benefits brandowners or other potential TLD applicants, and not the entity claiming the geographic term. Luzern is free to apply for the TLD Luzern, and for the TLD Lucerne. But it does not get global monopoly rights. Also, I think your interpretation of the "applicable law" provision of the ICANN Bylaws is significantly incorrect. It does not mean that ICANN must simultaneously comply with every local law in the world. That may be a pleasing interpretation for you in the present circumstance, but I can very quickly think of many unintended consequences when applied in any other context, or even this one. Best regards, Greg On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 12:16 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear David
ICANN has to act in conformity with applicable local law according to its Bylaws.
Brand rights are also basically local, but of a limited nature - to products/services in a specific category with the goal to avoid consumer confusion. There might eg exist hundreds of „lucerne foods“ in each country... in Switzerland there may be many such names with „lucerne“ as a part of their name.
But political communities with that exact name are more rare. And their rights on the name „as such“ are (in Switzerland and other countries) of a broad nature under civil right, as I have explained before. They are not limited to one specific category etc., not limited to commerce, not limited to avoid consumer confusion. Which is all logical as here what is at stake is not a commercial identifier but the identification of a political entity, with historic, social, economic, cultural aspects.
The DNS is global (and we want to keep it so). If one TLD is called „lucerne“ the laws on that name in Switzerland would apply...
Hope that these repeated explanations are clear to everyone by now.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: David Cake <dave@davecake.net> Datum: 8. Mai 2018 um 04:57:15 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
On 4 May 2018, at 2:12 pm, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Greg
They may have rights in a specific jurisdiction, regarding specific goods and services. They have no right on the name as such. Much less globally.
Jorge, isn’t your argument that rights in a specific jurisdiction, such as a municipality in Switzerland in Swiss law, do give them some global rights? I think that claim is weaker than trademark law, which has at least strong international agreements about trademark recognition.
David
Dear Greg Sorry for my bad English: what I meant is that there are potentially hundreds or thousands of „lucerne foods“, „lucerne salami“, „lucerne plants“, „lucerne wheels“... as long as they do not act in each other‘s category of products or services in given jurisdiction and do not create user confusion. I understand that you try to make an expansionist interpretation of trademark law. I feel that the key elements of my description are right and for the lawyerly details I would like to defer to Nicks native lawyer/English explanation. Happy to know your reasons (if any) why the Swiss law would not apply on a „lucerne“ TLD... It would surprise me that important jurisdictions and their courts, such as the French or German ones, had gotten that wrong... but maybe you can elaborate? best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 8. Mai 2018 um 07:36:32 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: David Cake <dave@davecake.net>, Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, Your explanation here does not accurately depict trademark law, to the detriment of trademark owners and consumers alike. I don't have the time to critique every sentence, but here are a few points. It is highly unlikely that there would be even a few "Lucerne Foods" in a given country; more likely there would be only one. Trademark registrations are, at the least, national in nature (not merely "local"), and a trademark registration for Lucerne Foods (or for "Lucerne" for food products) would almost certainly prevent any other entity from using or registering that mark in that country. "Common-law" (unregistered) trademarks may be more limited geographically, but under US law, a trademark registration confers "nationwide constructive use" on its owner. Also, as explained before, while a trademark registration is issued for a specific classes of goods and services (or subsets of those classes), the rights prevent use of the same or similar mark for the listed goods and services and any "related" goods and services. Your explanation also ignores the fact that many brandowners have registrations in multiple classes and in multiple countries. It's not uncommon for a trademark to be registered in 60, 70 or even many more countries. Similarly, it's not uncommon for a brandowner to have registrations in 5 or 10 (or even 15-20 or more) of the 45 classes of goods and services. I understand why you want to minimize trademark rights in this discussion, but your depiction is not accurate. I don't think "rarity" is necessarily germane here, and you confer "rarity" based on a flawed premise. But if we do think there's something to be said for "rarity," there will be many times this benefits brandowners or other potential TLD applicants, and not the entity claiming the geographic term. Luzern is free to apply for the TLD Luzern, and for the TLD Lucerne. But it does not get global monopoly rights. Also, I think your interpretation of the "applicable law" provision of the ICANN Bylaws is significantly incorrect. It does not mean that ICANN must simultaneously comply with every local law in the world. That may be a pleasing interpretation for you in the present circumstance, but I can very quickly think of many unintended consequences when applied in any other context, or even this one. Best regards, Greg On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 12:16 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear David ICANN has to act in conformity with applicable local law according to its Bylaws. Brand rights are also basically local, but of a limited nature - to products/services in a specific category with the goal to avoid consumer confusion. There might eg exist hundreds of „lucerne foods“ in each country... in Switzerland there may be many such names with „lucerne“ as a part of their name. But political communities with that exact name are more rare. And their rights on the name „as such“ are (in Switzerland and other countries) of a broad nature under civil right, as I have explained before. They are not limited to one specific category etc., not limited to commerce, not limited to avoid consumer confusion. Which is all logical as here what is at stake is not a commercial identifier but the identification of a political entity, with historic, social, economic, cultural aspects. The DNS is global (and we want to keep it so). If one TLD is called „lucerne“ the laws on that name in Switzerland would apply... Hope that these repeated explanations are clear to everyone by now. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> Datum: 8. Mai 2018 um 04:57:15 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names On 4 May 2018, at 2:12 pm, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg They may have rights in a specific jurisdiction, regarding specific goods and services. They have no right on the name as such. Much less globally. Jorge, isn’t your argument that rights in a specific jurisdiction, such as a municipality in Switzerland in Swiss law, do give them some global rights? I think that claim is weaker than trademark law, which has at least strong international agreements about trademark recognition. David
Dear all, I also feel like the long-standing work done in the community resulting in the AGB2012 is a compromise that we should keep. Right now a possibility for new and better policy (which will also be a compromise) looks a little blurry to me. Kind regards, Sanna Sahlman Legal Counsel Fi-domain names Finnish Communications Regulatory Authority (FICORA) -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: 8. toukokuuta 2018 8:52 To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg Sorry for my bad English: what I meant is that there are potentially hundreds or thousands of „lucerne foods“, „lucerne salami“, „lucerne plants“, „lucerne wheels“... as long as they do not act in each other‘s category of products or services in given jurisdiction and do not create user confusion. I understand that you try to make an expansionist interpretation of trademark law. I feel that the key elements of my description are right and for the lawyerly details I would like to defer to Nicks native lawyer/English explanation. Happy to know your reasons (if any) why the Swiss law would not apply on a „lucerne“ TLD... It would surprise me that important jurisdictions and their courts, such as the French or German ones, had gotten that wrong... but maybe you can elaborate? best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 8. Mai 2018 um 07:36:32 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: David Cake <dave@davecake.net>, Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, Your explanation here does not accurately depict trademark law, to the detriment of trademark owners and consumers alike. I don't have the time to critique every sentence, but here are a few points. It is highly unlikely that there would be even a few "Lucerne Foods" in a given country; more likely there would be only one. Trademark registrations are, at the least, national in nature (not merely "local"), and a trademark registration for Lucerne Foods (or for "Lucerne" for food products) would almost certainly prevent any other entity from using or registering that mark in that country. "Common-law" (unregistered) trademarks may be more limited geographically, but under US law, a trademark registration confers "nationwide constructive use" on its owner. Also, as explained before, while a trademark registration is issued for a specific classes of goods and services (or subsets of those classes), the rights prevent use of the same or similar mark for the listed goods and services and any "related" goods and services. Your explanation also ignores the fact that many brandowners have registrations in multiple classes and in multiple countries. It's not uncommon for a trademark to be registered in 60, 70 or even many more countries. Similarly, it's not uncommon for a brandowner to have registrations in 5 or 10 (or even 15-20 or more) of the 45 classes of goods and services. I understand why you want to minimize trademark rights in this discussion, but your depiction is not accurate. I don't think "rarity" is necessarily germane here, and you confer "rarity" based on a flawed premise. But if we do think there's something to be said for "rarity," there will be many times this benefits brandowners or other potential TLD applicants, and not the entity claiming the geographic term. Luzern is free to apply for the TLD Luzern, and for the TLD Lucerne. But it does not get global monopoly rights. Also, I think your interpretation of the "applicable law" provision of the ICANN Bylaws is significantly incorrect. It does not mean that ICANN must simultaneously comply with every local law in the world. That may be a pleasing interpretation for you in the present circumstance, but I can very quickly think of many unintended consequences when applied in any other context, or even this one. Best regards, Greg On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 12:16 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear David ICANN has to act in conformity with applicable local law according to its Bylaws. Brand rights are also basically local, but of a limited nature - to products/services in a specific category with the goal to avoid consumer confusion. There might eg exist hundreds of „lucerne foods“ in each country... in Switzerland there may be many such names with „lucerne“ as a part of their name. But political communities with that exact name are more rare. And their rights on the name „as such“ are (in Switzerland and other countries) of a broad nature under civil right, as I have explained before. They are not limited to one specific category etc., not limited to commerce, not limited to avoid consumer confusion. Which is all logical as here what is at stake is not a commercial identifier but the identification of a political entity, with historic, social, economic, cultural aspects. The DNS is global (and we want to keep it so). If one TLD is called „lucerne“ the laws on that name in Switzerland would apply... Hope that these repeated explanations are clear to everyone by now. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> Datum: 8. Mai 2018 um 04:57:15 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names On 4 May 2018, at 2:12 pm, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg They may have rights in a specific jurisdiction, regarding specific goods and services. They have no right on the name as such. Much less globally. Jorge, isn’t your argument that rights in a specific jurisdiction, such as a municipality in Switzerland in Swiss law, do give them some global rights? I think that claim is weaker than trademark law, which has at least strong international agreements about trademark recognition. David _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> > wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> ] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> > Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> >; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> > Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com <http://www.lucernefoods.com> ), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com <http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com <http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> > wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> ] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <http://kom.admin.ch> > Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> >; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> > Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> > wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> > Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> > Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> > www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au> <http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> >> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> >> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> >>, mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> > <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> > <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> ><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> ><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> >>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> ><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> ><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> >>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >> <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> ><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> ><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> ><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> >><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> ><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> >>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> ><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> ><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> ><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> >><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> ><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> >>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com <http://city.com> <http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> ><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> ><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> >><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> >>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> >>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> >>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> >><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> ><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> >>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> >>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> ><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> >>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> ><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> >>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> ><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> >><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> ><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> >>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> ><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> >><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> ><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> >>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> ><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> >><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> ><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> >>> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au> <http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote:
Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
*From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Greg Shatan *Sent:* Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM *To:* Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
*Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
*Von:* Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com] *Gesendet:* Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 *An:* Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>
*Cc:* Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> *Betreff:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com because www.lucerne.com was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have *one* string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
*Von:* Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com] *Gesendet:* Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 *An:* Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> *Cc:* Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
*Betreff:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> < mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com< http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> < mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com< http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<; http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto: dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net
<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto: dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<; http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com; alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a right to exclude. Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a likelihood of confusion basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the natural zone of expansion. Im not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America but NOT for LUCERNE! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string lucerne - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. Its rather the services and goods that you protect FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that governments think the rights of governments come first it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesnt make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. Lucerne Foods has no right on Lucerne it most probably just has a trademark for lucerne foods in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (Lucerne as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource .lucerne. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a citys name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the intended use. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, Sandwich may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the use is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the city name would be delegated. Think on .shanghai delegated for a non geo-use. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if .luzern were to be applied for, intending a non-geo use, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the jurisdiction Subgroup of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence ). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not object. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to allow bad policy to chase poor implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express objection to something. I would like to see the end of the non-objection process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they dont want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you dont object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz . Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City insurances, City salami, City whatever ) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin
<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg, You write: ..but a first right based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise important) cities: Nobody has a first right obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) I think we do not have to search for international law; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to some entity but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a sense of common good OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about minor geographical entities such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: .new and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve protection from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like capital is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the success of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a is the word a capital city question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we dont have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I dont recommend letters of support or non-objection. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz . Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com; alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin
<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Yes, I understand the difference. But what gives one priority over the other. You are, in effect, arguing that the civil code of Switzerland should take precedence in our judgment to the trademark code of Great Britain, say. Indeed, to my mind the narrower more focused right should generally be thought of as taking precedence since it is less limiting of others. Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Friday, May To: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com; gregshatanipc@gmail.com; alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com; alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a right to exclude. Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a likelihood of confusion basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the natural zone of expansion. Im not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America but NOT for LUCERNE! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string lucerne - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. Its rather the services and goods that you protect FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that governments think the rights of governments come first it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesnt make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. Lucerne Foods has no right on Lucerne it most probably just has a trademark for lucerne foods in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (Lucerne as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource .lucerne. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a citys name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the intended use. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.co m<http://www.lucernefoods.com>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, Sandwich may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the use is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the city name would be delegated. Think on .shanghai delegated for a non geo-use. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if .luzern were to be applied for, intending a non-geo use, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the jurisdiction Subgroup of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence ). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not object. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to allow bad policy to chase poor implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express objection to something. I would like to see the end of the non-objection process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they dont want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you dont object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz . Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City insurances, City salami, City whatever ) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin
<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg, You write: ..but a first right based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise important) cities: Nobody has a first right obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) I think we do not have to search for international law; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to some entity but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a sense of common good OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about minor geographical entities such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: .new and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve protection from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like capital is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the success of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a is the word a capital city question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we dont have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I dont recommend letters of support or non-objection. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz . Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Paul That is probably a strange way of seeing things. The brand holder would have only an interest worth protecting if the string is used by someone else in commerce, in the same category of product or service, and consumer confusion is at stake. The city under Swiss law has a right to sue against the use of its name, without such strings attached, i.e. it is a more ample right. But again, what is key here is that the applicant needs to talk to the city with that very name and get at least its non-objection. Everything else is an invitation for protracted conflicts as we have seen in some cases NOT subject to this instrument... best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:04:30 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Yes, I understand the difference. But what gives one priority over the other. You are, in effect, arguing that the civil code of Switzerland should take precedence in our judgment to the trademark code of Great Britain, say. Indeed, to my mind the narrower more focused right should generally be thought of as taking precedence since it is less limiting of others. Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Friday, May To: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com; gregshatanipc@gmail.com; alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com; alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (<http://>www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.co m<http://www.lucernefoods.com>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin
<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Jorge: Do you think that applicant should have to talk to the city and get a non-objection letter if the applicant was not using the TLD in a way at all related to the city? I don't have a problem with letters of non-objection in cases where the TLD is being targeted to the city population itself, but not in every instance. For example, in the case of Arch, Switzerland, do you think that the Swiss municipality should have veto rights on whether a group of architects could secure .ARCH to collect and display photos of interesting arches around the world or whether the Arch Insurance Co in New Jersey, US should be able to have a TLD for its network of brokers? Thanks. Jon
On May 4, 2018, at 12:48 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Paul That is probably a strange way of seeing things. The brand holder would have only an interest worth protecting if the string is used by someone else in commerce, in the same category of product or service, and consumer confusion is at stake. The city under Swiss law has a right to sue against the use of its name, without such strings attached, i.e. it is a more ample right. But again, what is key here is that the applicant needs to talk to the city with that very name and get at least its non-objection. Everything else is an invitation for protracted conflicts as we have seen in some cases NOT subject to this instrument... best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:04:30 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Yes, I understand the difference. But what gives one priority over the other. You are, in effect, arguing that the civil code of Switzerland should take precedence in our judgment to the trademark code of Great Britain, say. Indeed, to my mind the narrower more focused right should generally be thought of as taking precedence since it is less limiting of others.
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Friday, May To: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com; gregshatanipc@gmail.com; alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another?
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com; alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (<http://>www.lucernefoods.com <http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.com <http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.co <http://www.lucernefoods.co/> m<http://www.lucernefoods.com <http://www.lucernefoods.com/>>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com <http://lucernefoods.com/><http://lucernefoods.com <http://lucernefoods.com/>> because www.lucerne.com <http://www.lucerne.com/><http://www.lucerne.com <http://www.lucerne.com/>> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://kom.admin.ch <http://kom.admin.ch/>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin
<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Hi Jon I cannot speak for all 2000+ cities in Switzerland ;-) They have rights on their name but I guess that getting at a table with them would be fruitful. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Jon Nevett <jon@donuts.email> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 19:00:29 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge: Do you think that applicant should have to talk to the city and get a non-objection letter if the applicant was not using the TLD in a way at all related to the city? I don't have a problem with letters of non-objection in cases where the TLD is being targeted to the city population itself, but not in every instance. For example, in the case of Arch, Switzerland, do you think that the Swiss municipality should have veto rights on whether a group of architects could secure .ARCH to collect and display photos of interesting arches around the world or whether the Arch Insurance Co in New Jersey, US should be able to have a TLD for its network of brokers? Thanks. Jon On May 4, 2018, at 12:48 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Paul That is probably a strange way of seeing things. The brand holder would have only an interest worth protecting if the string is used by someone else in commerce, in the same category of product or service, and consumer confusion is at stake. The city under Swiss law has a right to sue against the use of its name, without such strings attached, i.e. it is a more ample right. But again, what is key here is that the applicant needs to talk to the city with that very name and get at least its non-objection. Everything else is an invitation for protracted conflicts as we have seen in some cases NOT subject to this instrument... best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:04:30 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Yes, I understand the difference. But what gives one priority over the other. You are, in effect, arguing that the civil code of Switzerland should take precedence in our judgment to the trademark code of Great Britain, say. Indeed, to my mind the narrower more focused right should generally be thought of as taking precedence since it is less limiting of others. Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Sent: Friday, May To: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>; gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (<http://>www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.co<http://www.lucernefoods.co/> m<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/>>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/><http://lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/>> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/><http://www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/>> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://kom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch/>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com><http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com<http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<http://gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<http://cann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org<http://icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><; mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<http://g.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au<mailto:iams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au<http://rg.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au<mailto:ams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<http://g.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Jorge, But this really isn’t about “getting at a table” with equals, this is a policy which gives one party the unilateral veto right over all others for a TLD. Which means the applicant has to go begging to the govt(s) for a non-objection letter. Of course "nothing gets you nothing” in this world, so the govt is now empowered to extract conditions, including possibly payments from the applicant in order to obtain that letter permitting the TLD to proceed. Even in cases where the TLD is not going to be used to refer to the geo meaning or to misrepresent a connection to the term, that letter is required. No doubt govts want to require as many people as possible must "get at the table" since that means more people must pay govts for TLDs to go forward. The more one looks at it, it appears the non-objection letter is a type of "extortion scheme" for TLDs, bad policy for a free and open Internet. And the policy wasn’t something that the GNSO actually approved in the last round. It was one of those post-approval board-staff "implementation details" that went off the rails due to intense govt pressure to ignore the GNSO-approved policy on the issue and give govts more power at ICANN anyway. The policy must be reconsidered for both of these reasons. Best, Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 10:18 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Hi Jon I cannot speak for all 2000+ cities in Switzerland ;-) They have rights on their name but I guess that getting at a table with them would be fruitful. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Jon Nevett <jon@donuts.email> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 19:00:29 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge:
Do you think that applicant should have to talk to the city and get a non-objection letter if the applicant was not using the TLD in a way at all related to the city? I don't have a problem with letters of non-objection in cases where the TLD is being targeted to the city population itself, but not in every instance. For example, in the case of Arch, Switzerland, do you think that the Swiss municipality should have veto rights on whether a group of architects could secure .ARCH to collect and display photos of interesting arches around the world or whether the Arch Insurance Co in New Jersey, US should be able to have a TLD for its network of brokers?
Thanks.
Jon
On May 4, 2018, at 12:48 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote:
Dear Paul That is probably a strange way of seeing things. The brand holder would have only an interest worth protecting if the string is used by someone else in commerce, in the same category of product or service, and consumer confusion is at stake. The city under Swiss law has a right to sue against the use of its name, without such strings attached, i.e. it is a more ample right. But again, what is key here is that the applicant needs to talk to the city with that very name and get at least its non-objection. Everything else is an invitation for protracted conflicts as we have seen in some cases NOT subject to this instrument... best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:04:30 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Yes, I understand the difference. But what gives one priority over the other. You are, in effect, arguing that the civil code of Switzerland should take precedence in our judgment to the trademark code of Great Britain, say. Indeed, to my mind the narrower more focused right should generally be thought of as taking precedence since it is less limiting of others.
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Sent: Friday, May To: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>; gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another?
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (<http://>www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.co<http://www.lucernefoods.co/> m<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/>>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/><http://lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/>> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/><http://www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/>> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://kom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch/>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com><http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com<http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<http://gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<http://cann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org<http://icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><; mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<http://g.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au<mailto:iams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au<http://rg.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au<mailto:ams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<http://g.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Robin, Jorge, All, Thanks for your thoughtful comments. The mail-list has been very interesting and enlightening today, and in previous days also. As discussed in the last call, all these threads have been and will continue to be incorporated in a document to memorialize them and try and find ways forward from a policy perspective. Robin, what could be a practicable alternative or general way forward to change the current “non-objection” scheme, which somehow takes into account all these competing public and private interests? Regards, Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 4, 2018, at 2:22 PM, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
Dear Jorge,
But this really isn’t about “getting at a table” with equals, this is a policy which gives one party the unilateral veto right over all others for a TLD. Which means the applicant has to go begging to the govt(s) for a non-objection letter. Of course "nothing gets you nothing” in this world, so the govt is now empowered to extract conditions, including possibly payments from the applicant in order to obtain that letter permitting the TLD to proceed. Even in cases where the TLD is not going to be used to refer to the geo meaning or to misrepresent a connection to the term, that letter is required. No doubt govts want to require as many people as possible must "get at the table" since that means more people must pay govts for TLDs to go forward. The more one looks at it, it appears the non-objection letter is a type of "extortion scheme" for TLDs, bad policy for a free and open Internet. And the policy wasn’t something that the GNSO actually approved in the last round. It was one of those post-approval board-staff "implementation details" that went off the rails due to intense govt pressure to ignore the GNSO-approved policy on the issue and give govts more power at ICANN anyway. The policy must be reconsidered for both of these reasons.
Best, Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 10:18 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Hi Jon I cannot speak for all 2000+ cities in Switzerland ;-) They have rights on their name but I guess that getting at a table with them would be fruitful. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Jon Nevett <jon@donuts.email> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 19:00:29 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge:
Do you think that applicant should have to talk to the city and get a non-objection letter if the applicant was not using the TLD in a way at all related to the city? I don't have a problem with letters of non-objection in cases where the TLD is being targeted to the city population itself, but not in every instance. For example, in the case of Arch, Switzerland, do you think that the Swiss municipality should have veto rights on whether a group of architects could secure .ARCH to collect and display photos of interesting arches around the world or whether the Arch Insurance Co in New Jersey, US should be able to have a TLD for its network of brokers?
Thanks.
Jon
On May 4, 2018, at 12:48 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote:
Dear Paul That is probably a strange way of seeing things. The brand holder would have only an interest worth protecting if the string is used by someone else in commerce, in the same category of product or service, and consumer confusion is at stake. The city under Swiss law has a right to sue against the use of its name, without such strings attached, i.e. it is a more ample right. But again, what is key here is that the applicant needs to talk to the city with that very name and get at least its non-objection. Everything else is an invitation for protracted conflicts as we have seen in some cases NOT subject to this instrument... best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:04:30 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Yes, I understand the difference. But what gives one priority over the other. You are, in effect, arguing that the civil code of Switzerland should take precedence in our judgment to the trademark code of Great Britain, say. Indeed, to my mind the narrower more focused right should generally be thought of as taking precedence since it is less limiting of others.
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Sent: Friday, May To: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>; gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another?
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (<http://>www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.co<http://www.lucernefoods.co/> m<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/>>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/><http://lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/>> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/><http://www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/>> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://kom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch/>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com><http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com<http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<http://gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<http://cann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org<http://icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><; mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<http://g.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au<mailto:iams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au<http://rg.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au<mailto:ams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<http://g.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Thanks, Javier. I think Greg has already alluded to one fruitful way forward in evaluating these competing interests, which is to evaluate the intended use of TLD. And I would add, in particular, to evaluate if the applicant intends to misrepresent their connection or authority with respect to the geo term at issue. We can allow legitimate uses, while also preventing those intending to misrepresent themselves as being connected to a govt when they aren’t, which is a concern we all share. And it would keep ICANN clear of having to take sides or otherwise weigh-in on the multiplicity of hot button political issues, eager to utilize such a lever of control over the Internet, thereby endangering ICANN’s independence and neutrality (and ultimately its legitimacy). The initial policy that was approved by both the board and the GNSO in accordance with ICANN’s bylaws was to use the standard objection process set forth in the New GTLD Program, which applied to all applicants and all others with a competing interest in the term. I see no reason why a standard objection process, which applies to everyone, could not be used as a basis for evaluating those claims further, and in particular look at whether the applicant is engaged in misrepresentation with the intended use of the TLD. That would be a better starting place rather than the non-objection letter process, which again, was hastily developed by staff after the first policy was approved by the GNSO and Board, and which changed that approved policy significantly. I’d also be curious to hear others thoughts. Thanks, Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 11:35 AM, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
Robin, Jorge, All,
Thanks for your thoughtful comments. The mail-list has been very interesting and enlightening today, and in previous days also. As discussed in the last call, all these threads have been and will continue to be incorporated in a document to memorialize them and try and find ways forward from a policy perspective.
Robin, what could be a practicable alternative or general way forward to change the current “non-objection” scheme, which somehow takes into account all these competing public and private interests?
Regards,
Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua <https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua>
On May 4, 2018, at 2:22 PM, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org <mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> wrote:
Dear Jorge,
But this really isn’t about “getting at a table” with equals, this is a policy which gives one party the unilateral veto right over all others for a TLD. Which means the applicant has to go begging to the govt(s) for a non-objection letter. Of course "nothing gets you nothing” in this world, so the govt is now empowered to extract conditions, including possibly payments from the applicant in order to obtain that letter permitting the TLD to proceed. Even in cases where the TLD is not going to be used to refer to the geo meaning or to misrepresent a connection to the term, that letter is required. No doubt govts want to require as many people as possible must "get at the table" since that means more people must pay govts for TLDs to go forward. The more one looks at it, it appears the non-objection letter is a type of "extortion scheme" for TLDs, bad policy for a free and open Internet. And the policy wasn’t something that the GNSO actually approved in the last round. It was one of those post-approval board-staff "implementation details" that went off the rails due to intense govt pressure to ignore the GNSO-approved policy on the issue and give govts more power at ICANN anyway. The policy must be reconsidered for both of these reasons.
Best, Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 10:18 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote:
Hi Jon I cannot speak for all 2000+ cities in Switzerland ;-) They have rights on their name but I guess that getting at a table with them would be fruitful. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Jon Nevett <jon@donuts.email <mailto:jon@donuts.email>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 19:00:29 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>>, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge:
Do you think that applicant should have to talk to the city and get a non-objection letter if the applicant was not using the TLD in a way at all related to the city? I don't have a problem with letters of non-objection in cases where the TLD is being targeted to the city population itself, but not in every instance. For example, in the case of Arch, Switzerland, do you think that the Swiss municipality should have veto rights on whether a group of architects could secure .ARCH to collect and display photos of interesting arches around the world or whether the Arch Insurance Co in New Jersey, US should be able to have a TLD for its network of brokers?
Thanks.
Jon
On May 4, 2018, at 12:48 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote:
Dear Paul That is probably a strange way of seeing things. The brand holder would have only an interest worth protecting if the string is used by someone else in commerce, in the same category of product or service, and consumer confusion is at stake. The city under Swiss law has a right to sue against the use of its name, without such strings attached, i.e. it is a more ample right. But again, what is key here is that the applicant needs to talk to the city with that very name and get at least its non-objection. Everything else is an invitation for protracted conflicts as we have seen in some cases NOT subject to this instrument... best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:04:30 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Yes, I understand the difference. But what gives one priority over the other. You are, in effect, arguing that the civil code of Switzerland should take precedence in our judgment to the trademark code of Great Britain, say. Indeed, to my mind the narrower more focused right should generally be thought of as taking precedence since it is less limiting of others.
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Sent: Friday, May To: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>>; gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>; alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> <alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another?
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>; alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> <alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org <mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org <mailto:nces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (<http://>www.lucernefoods.com <http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.com/ <http://www.lucernefoods.com/>><http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.co<http://www.lucernefoods.co/> <http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.co<http://www.lucernefoods.co/>> m<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/>> <http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/>>>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com <http://lucernefoods.com/><http://lucernefoods.com/ <http://lucernefoods.com/>><http://lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/> <http://lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/>>> because www.lucerne.com <http://www.lucerne.com/><http://www.lucerne.com/ <http://www.lucerne.com/>><http://www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/> <http://www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/>>> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><http://kom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch/>> <http://kom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch/>>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au <mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au <mailto:s@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> <http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com <mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com <mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net <http://ca.inter.net/>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net <http://ca.inter.net/>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com <http://france.com/><http://France.com <http://france.com/>><http://France.com <http://france.com/>>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> <http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch/><http://bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com <http://gh.com/><http://gh.com <http://gh.com/>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch/><http://bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com <mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com <mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com <mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com <mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net <http://ca.inter.net/>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net <http://ca.inter.net/>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> <http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch/><http://bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch <http://om.admin.ch/><http://om.admin.ch <http://om.admin.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch <http://min.ch/><http://min.ch <http://min.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch/>>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com <http://gh.com/><http://gh.com <http://gh.com/>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com <http://odenbaugh.com/><http://odenbaugh.com <http://odenbaugh.com/>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com <http://augh.com/><http://augh.com <http://augh.com/>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch/><http://bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch <http://om.admin.ch/><http://om.admin.ch <http://om.admin.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch <http://min.ch/><http://min.ch <http://min.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch/>>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com <mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com <mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com <mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com <mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com <http://il.com/><http://il.com <http://il.com/>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><http://gmail.com <http://gmail.com/>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com <mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com <mailto:ipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net <http://ca.inter.net/>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte <mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net <http://r.net/><http://r.net <http://r.net/>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i <mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net <http://nter.net/><http://nter.net <http://nter.net/>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net <http://ca.inter.net/>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com <http://city.com/><http://city.com <http://city.com/>><http://city.com <http://city.com/>><http://city.com/ <http://city.com/>><http://city.com <http://city.com/><http://city.com <http://city.com/> />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>> <http://city.com<http://city.com/>>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> <http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch/><http://bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch <http://om.admin.ch/><http://om.admin.ch <http://om.admin.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch <http://min.ch/><http://min.ch <http://min.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch/>>>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org <mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org <mailto:nces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org <mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:unces@icann.org <mailto:unces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org <mailto:ounces@icann.org><mailto:ounces@icann.org <mailto:ounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o> rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net <http://ca.inter.net/>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int <mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net <http://er.net/><http://er.net <http://er.net/>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net <http://inter.net/><http://inter.net <http://inter.net/>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net <mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net <mailto:l@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net <http://ca.inter.net/>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int <mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net <http://er.net/><http://er.net <http://er.net/>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net <http://inter.net/><http://inter.net <http://inter.net/>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net <mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net <mailto:l@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org <http://ann.org/><http://ann.org <http://ann.org/>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org <http://cann.org/><http://cann.org <http://cann.org/>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org<http://icann.org <http://icann.org/>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org <mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org <mailto:nces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org <mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:unces@icann.org <mailto:unces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto :dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mail to:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><http://davecake.net <http://davecake.net/>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><m ailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><http://davecake.net <http://davecake.net/>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto :dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mail to:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><http://davecake.net <http://davecake.net/>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><ma ilto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><http://davecake.net <http://davecake.net/>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au <mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au <mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or <mailto:liz.williams@auda.or> g.au <http://g.au/><http://g.au <http://g.au/>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au <mailto:iams@auda.org.au><mailto:iams@auda.org.au <mailto:iams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.o <mailto:liz.williams@auda.o> rg.au <http://rg.au/><http://rg.au <http://rg.au/>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><http://auda.org.au <http://auda.org.au/>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au <mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au <mailto:s@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au <mailto:ams@auda.org.au><mailto:ams@auda.org.au <mailto:ams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or <mailto:liz.williams@auda.or> g.au <http://g.au/><http://g.au <http://g.au/>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><http://auda.org.au <http://auda.org.au/>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/ <http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www <http://www/>. auda.org.au <http://auda.org.au/><http://auda.org.au <http://auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/ <http://www.auda.org.au/>>><http://www.auda.org.au/ <http://www.auda.org.au/>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5> _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
Robin, Thank you (and Greg) for your thoughtful answers! Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 4, 2018, at 7:30 PM, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
Thanks, Javier. I think Greg has already alluded to one fruitful way forward in evaluating these competing interests, which is to evaluate the intended use of TLD. And I would add, in particular, to evaluate if the applicant intends to misrepresent their connection or authority with respect to the geo term at issue. We can allow legitimate uses, while also preventing those intending to misrepresent themselves as being connected to a govt when they aren’t, which is a concern we all share. And it would keep ICANN clear of having to take sides or otherwise weigh-in on the multiplicity of hot button political issues, eager to utilize such a lever of control over the Internet, thereby endangering ICANN’s independence and neutrality (and ultimately its legitimacy).
The initial policy that was approved by both the board and the GNSO in accordance with ICANN’s bylaws was to use the standard objection process set forth in the New GTLD Program, which applied to all applicants and all others with a competing interest in the term. I see no reason why a standard objection process, which applies to everyone, could not be used as a basis for evaluating those claims further, and in particular look at whether the applicant is engaged in misrepresentation with the intended use of the TLD. That would be a better starting place rather than the non-objection letter process, which again, was hastily developed by staff after the first policy was approved by the GNSO and Board, and which changed that approved policy significantly.
I’d also be curious to hear others thoughts.
Thanks, Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 11:35 AM, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
Robin, Jorge, All,
Thanks for your thoughtful comments. The mail-list has been very interesting and enlightening today, and in previous days also. As discussed in the last call, all these threads have been and will continue to be incorporated in a document to memorialize them and try and find ways forward from a policy perspective.
Robin, what could be a practicable alternative or general way forward to change the current “non-objection” scheme, which somehow takes into account all these competing public and private interests?
Regards,
Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 4, 2018, at 2:22 PM, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
Dear Jorge,
But this really isn’t about “getting at a table” with equals, this is a policy which gives one party the unilateral veto right over all others for a TLD. Which means the applicant has to go begging to the govt(s) for a non-objection letter. Of course "nothing gets you nothing” in this world, so the govt is now empowered to extract conditions, including possibly payments from the applicant in order to obtain that letter permitting the TLD to proceed. Even in cases where the TLD is not going to be used to refer to the geo meaning or to misrepresent a connection to the term, that letter is required. No doubt govts want to require as many people as possible must "get at the table" since that means more people must pay govts for TLDs to go forward. The more one looks at it, it appears the non-objection letter is a type of "extortion scheme" for TLDs, bad policy for a free and open Internet. And the policy wasn’t something that the GNSO actually approved in the last round. It was one of those post-approval board-staff "implementation details" that went off the rails due to intense govt pressure to ignore the GNSO-approved policy on the issue and give govts more power at ICANN anyway. The policy must be reconsidered for both of these reasons.
Best, Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 10:18 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Hi Jon I cannot speak for all 2000+ cities in Switzerland ;-) They have rights on their name but I guess that getting at a table with them would be fruitful. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Jon Nevett <jon@donuts.email> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 19:00:29 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge:
Do you think that applicant should have to talk to the city and get a non-objection letter if the applicant was not using the TLD in a way at all related to the city? I don't have a problem with letters of non-objection in cases where the TLD is being targeted to the city population itself, but not in every instance. For example, in the case of Arch, Switzerland, do you think that the Swiss municipality should have veto rights on whether a group of architects could secure .ARCH to collect and display photos of interesting arches around the world or whether the Arch Insurance Co in New Jersey, US should be able to have a TLD for its network of brokers?
Thanks.
Jon
On May 4, 2018, at 12:48 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote:
Dear Paul That is probably a strange way of seeing things. The brand holder would have only an interest worth protecting if the string is used by someone else in commerce, in the same category of product or service, and consumer confusion is at stake. The city under Swiss law has a right to sue against the use of its name, without such strings attached, i.e. it is a more ample right. But again, what is key here is that the applicant needs to talk to the city with that very name and get at least its non-objection. Everything else is an invitation for protracted conflicts as we have seen in some cases NOT subject to this instrument... best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:04:30 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Yes, I understand the difference. But what gives one priority over the other. You are, in effect, arguing that the civil code of Switzerland should take precedence in our judgment to the trademark code of Great Britain, say. Indeed, to my mind the narrower more focused right should generally be thought of as taking precedence since it is less limiting of others.
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Sent: Friday, May To: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>; gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another?
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (<http://>www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.co<http://www.lucernefoods.co/> m<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/>>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/><http://lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/>> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/><http://www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/>> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://kom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch/>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com><http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com<http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<http://gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<http://cann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org<http://icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><; mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<http://g.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au<mailto:iams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au<http://rg.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au<mailto:ams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<http://g.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear all, As far as I understand, non-objection process worked reasonably well in the 2012 round. Very few cities have the resources to constantly scan the new gTLD horizon, detect cases of their name being applied for and file objections. One would think that also the applicant would want to make sure that there is no objection before getting too far in the process, rather than to risk an objection at a later stage. BTW, Giacomo's post about Capri was interesting. It shows that even non-geographic use can be problematic. Best, Yrjö ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 3:05 AM To: Robin Gross Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Robin, Thank you (and Greg) for your thoughtful answers! Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua [https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/C4E03AQHPwt2QQSZKcg/profile-displayphoto-shrink_200_200/0?e=1530748800&v=beta&t=LX1lZqIWsiR8nKQduiHjTU4WA02JyHgBbnDTwwRM3yU]<https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua> Javier Rúa-Jovet | LinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua> www.linkedin.com View Javier Rúa-Jovet’s profile on LinkedIn, the world's largest professional community. Javier has 8 jobs jobs listed on their profile. See the complete profile on LinkedIn and discover Javier’s connections and jobs at similar companies. On May 4, 2018, at 7:30 PM, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> wrote: Thanks, Javier. I think Greg has already alluded to one fruitful way forward in evaluating these competing interests, which is to evaluate the intended use of TLD. And I would add, in particular, to evaluate if the applicant intends to misrepresent their connection or authority with respect to the geo term at issue. We can allow legitimate uses, while also preventing those intending to misrepresent themselves as being connected to a govt when they aren’t, which is a concern we all share. And it would keep ICANN clear of having to take sides or otherwise weigh-in on the multiplicity of hot button political issues, eager to utilize such a lever of control over the Internet, thereby endangering ICANN’s independence and neutrality (and ultimately its legitimacy). The initial policy that was approved by both the board and the GNSO in accordance with ICANN’s bylaws was to use the standard objection process set forth in the New GTLD Program, which applied to all applicants and all others with a competing interest in the term. I see no reason why a standard objection process, which applies to everyone, could not be used as a basis for evaluating those claims further, and in particular look at whether the applicant is engaged in misrepresentation with the intended use of the TLD. That would be a better starting place rather than the non-objection letter process, which again, was hastily developed by staff after the first policy was approved by the GNSO and Board, and which changed that approved policy significantly. I’d also be curious to hear others thoughts. Thanks, Robin On May 4, 2018, at 11:35 AM, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com<mailto:javrua@gmail.com>> wrote: Robin, Jorge, All, Thanks for your thoughtful comments. The mail-list has been very interesting and enlightening today, and in previous days also. As discussed in the last call, all these threads have been and will continue to be incorporated in a document to memorialize them and try and find ways forward from a policy perspective. Robin, what could be a practicable alternative or general way forward to change the current “non-objection” scheme, which somehow takes into account all these competing public and private interests? Regards, Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua On May 4, 2018, at 2:22 PM, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> wrote: Dear Jorge, But this really isn’t about “getting at a table” with equals, this is a policy which gives one party the unilateral veto right over all others for a TLD. Which means the applicant has to go begging to the govt(s) for a non-objection letter. Of course "nothing gets you nothing” in this world, so the govt is now empowered to extract conditions, including possibly payments from the applicant in order to obtain that letter permitting the TLD to proceed. Even in cases where the TLD is not going to be used to refer to the geo meaning or to misrepresent a connection to the term, that letter is required. No doubt govts want to require as many people as possible must "get at the table" since that means more people must pay govts for TLDs to go forward. The more one looks at it, it appears the non-objection letter is a type of "extortion scheme" for TLDs, bad policy for a free and open Internet. And the policy wasn’t something that the GNSO actually approved in the last round. It was one of those post-approval board-staff "implementation details" that went off the rails due to intense govt pressure to ignore the GNSO-approved policy on the issue and give govts more power at ICANN anyway. The policy must be reconsidered for both of these reasons. Best, Robin On May 4, 2018, at 10:18 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Hi Jon I cannot speak for all 2000+ cities in Switzerland ;-) They have rights on their name but I guess that getting at a table with them would be fruitful. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Jon Nevett <jon@donuts.email<mailto:jon@donuts.email>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 19:00:29 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>>, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge: Do you think that applicant should have to talk to the city and get a non-objection letter if the applicant was not using the TLD in a way at all related to the city? I don't have a problem with letters of non-objection in cases where the TLD is being targeted to the city population itself, but not in every instance. For example, in the case of Arch, Switzerland, do you think that the Swiss municipality should have veto rights on whether a group of architects could secure .ARCH to collect and display photos of interesting arches around the world or whether the Arch Insurance Co in New Jersey, US should be able to have a TLD for its network of brokers? Thanks. Jon On May 4, 2018, at 12:48 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Paul That is probably a strange way of seeing things. The brand holder would have only an interest worth protecting if the string is used by someone else in commerce, in the same category of product or service, and consumer confusion is at stake. The city under Swiss law has a right to sue against the use of its name, without such strings attached, i.e. it is a more ample right. But again, what is key here is that the applicant needs to talk to the city with that very name and get at least its non-objection. Everything else is an invitation for protracted conflicts as we have seen in some cases NOT subject to this instrument... best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:04:30 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Yes, I understand the difference. But what gives one priority over the other. You are, in effect, arguing that the civil code of Switzerland should take precedence in our judgment to the trademark code of Great Britain, say. Indeed, to my mind the narrower more focused right should generally be thought of as taking precedence since it is less limiting of others. Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Sent: Friday, May To: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>; gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (<http://>www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.co<http://www.lucernefoods.co/> m<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/>>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/><http://lucernefoods.com/><http://lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/>> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/><http://www.lucerne.com/><http://www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/>> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://kom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch/>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net/>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net/>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://france.com/><http://France.com<http://france.com/>><http://France.com<http://france.com/>>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch/><http://bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<http://gh.com/><http://gh.com<http://gh.com/>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch/><http://bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net/>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net/>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch/><http://bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch/><http://om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch/><http://min.ch<http://min.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch/>>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<http://gh.com/><http://gh.com<http://gh.com/>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com/><http://odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com/>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com<http://augh.com/><http://augh.com<http://augh.com/>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch/><http://bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch/><http://om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch/><http://min.ch<http://min.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch/>>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com<http://il.com/><http://il.com<http://il.com/>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><http://gmail.com<http://gmail.com/>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net/>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<http://r.net/><http://r.net<http://r.net/>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net<http://nter.net/><http://nter.net<http://nter.net/>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net/>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/> />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch/><http://bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch/><http://om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch/><http://min.ch<http://min.ch/>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch/>>>>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org><mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net/>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<http://er.net/><http://er.net<http://er.net/>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<http://inter.net/><http://inter.net<http://inter.net/>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net/>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<http://er.net/><http://er.net<http://er.net/>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<http://inter.net/><http://inter.net<http://inter.net/>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org<http://ann.org/><http://ann.org<http://ann.org/>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<http://cann.org/><http://cann.org<http://cann.org/>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org<http://icann.org><http://icann.org<http://icann.org/>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><http://davecake.net<http://davecake.net/>><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><http://davecake.net<http://davecake.net/>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><http://davecake.net<http://davecake.net/>><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><http://davecake.net<http://davecake.net/>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><; mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<http://g.au/><http://g.au<http://g.au/>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au<mailto:iams@auda.org.au><mailto:iams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au<http://rg.au/><http://rg.au<http://rg.au/>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><http://auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au/>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au<mailto:ams@auda.org.au><mailto:ams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<http://g.au/><http://g.au<http://g.au/>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><http://auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au/>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www<http://www/>. auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au/><http://auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear All Is good to just talk on any u defined criteria and unimplemenrable ones. Who and how and with what criteria one c. verify such misconnections? Regardas Kavouss Sent from my iPhone
On 5 May 2018, at 01:30, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
Thanks, Javier. I think Greg has already alluded to one fruitful way forward in evaluating these competing interests, which is to evaluate the intended use of TLD. And I would add, in particular, to evaluate if the applicant intends to misrepresent their connection or authority with respect to the geo term at issue. We can allow legitimate uses, while also preventing those intending to misrepresent themselves as being connected to a govt when they aren’t, which is a concern we all share. And it would keep ICANN clear of having to take sides or otherwise weigh-in on the multiplicity of hot button political issues, eager to utilize such a lever of control over the Internet, thereby endangering ICANN’s independence and neutrality (and ultimately its legitimacy).
The initial policy that was approved by both the board and the GNSO in accordance with ICANN’s bylaws was to use the standard objection process set forth in the New GTLD Program, which applied to all applicants and all others with a competing interest in the term. I see no reason why a standard objection process, which applies to everyone, could not be used as a basis for evaluating those claims further, and in particular look at whether the applicant is engaged in misrepresentation with the intended use of the TLD. That would be a better starting place rather than the non-objection letter process, which again, was hastily developed by staff after the first policy was approved by the GNSO and Board, and which changed that approved policy significantly.
I’d also be curious to hear others thoughts.
Thanks, Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 11:35 AM, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
Robin, Jorge, All,
Thanks for your thoughtful comments. The mail-list has been very interesting and enlightening today, and in previous days also. As discussed in the last call, all these threads have been and will continue to be incorporated in a document to memorialize them and try and find ways forward from a policy perspective.
Robin, what could be a practicable alternative or general way forward to change the current “non-objection” scheme, which somehow takes into account all these competing public and private interests?
Regards,
Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 4, 2018, at 2:22 PM, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
Dear Jorge,
But this really isn’t about “getting at a table” with equals, this is a policy which gives one party the unilateral veto right over all others for a TLD. Which means the applicant has to go begging to the govt(s) for a non-objection letter. Of course "nothing gets you nothing” in this world, so the govt is now empowered to extract conditions, including possibly payments from the applicant in order to obtain that letter permitting the TLD to proceed. Even in cases where the TLD is not going to be used to refer to the geo meaning or to misrepresent a connection to the term, that letter is required. No doubt govts want to require as many people as possible must "get at the table" since that means more people must pay govts for TLDs to go forward. The more one looks at it, it appears the non-objection letter is a type of "extortion scheme" for TLDs, bad policy for a free and open Internet. And the policy wasn’t something that the GNSO actually approved in the last round. It was one of those post-approval board-staff "implementation details" that went off the rails due to intense govt pressure to ignore the GNSO-approved policy on the issue and give govts more power at ICANN anyway. The policy must be reconsidered for both of these reasons.
Best, Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 10:18 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Hi Jon I cannot speak for all 2000+ cities in Switzerland ;-) They have rights on their name but I guess that getting at a table with them would be fruitful. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Jon Nevett <jon@donuts.email> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 19:00:29 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge:
Do you think that applicant should have to talk to the city and get a non-objection letter if the applicant was not using the TLD in a way at all related to the city? I don't have a problem with letters of non-objection in cases where the TLD is being targeted to the city population itself, but not in every instance. For example, in the case of Arch, Switzerland, do you think that the Swiss municipality should have veto rights on whether a group of architects could secure .ARCH to collect and display photos of interesting arches around the world or whether the Arch Insurance Co in New Jersey, US should be able to have a TLD for its network of brokers?
Thanks.
Jon
On May 4, 2018, at 12:48 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote:
Dear Paul That is probably a strange way of seeing things. The brand holder would have only an interest worth protecting if the string is used by someone else in commerce, in the same category of product or service, and consumer confusion is at stake. The city under Swiss law has a right to sue against the use of its name, without such strings attached, i.e. it is a more ample right. But again, what is key here is that the applicant needs to talk to the city with that very name and get at least its non-objection. Everything else is an invitation for protracted conflicts as we have seen in some cases NOT subject to this instrument... best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:04:30 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Yes, I understand the difference. But what gives one priority over the other. You are, in effect, arguing that the civil code of Switzerland should take precedence in our judgment to the trademark code of Great Britain, say. Indeed, to my mind the narrower more focused right should generally be thought of as taking precedence since it is less limiting of others.
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Sent: Friday, May To: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>; gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another?
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (<http://>www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.co<http://www.lucernefoods.co/> m<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/>>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/><http://lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/>> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/><http://www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/>> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://kom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch/>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com><http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com<http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<http://gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<http://cann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org<http://icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><; mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<http://g.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au<mailto:iams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au<http://rg.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au<mailto:ams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<http://g.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
I agree completely with both points, thanks Robin! Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 11:22 AM, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
Dear Jorge,
But this really isn’t about “getting at a table” with equals, this is a policy which gives one party the unilateral veto right over all others for a TLD. Which means the applicant has to go begging to the govt(s) for a non-objection letter. Of course "nothing gets you nothing” in this world, so the govt is now empowered to extract conditions, including possibly payments from the applicant in order to obtain that letter permitting the TLD to proceed. Even in cases where the TLD is not going to be used to refer to the geo meaning or to misrepresent a connection to the term, that letter is required. No doubt govts want to require as many people as possible must "get at the table" since that means more people must pay govts for TLDs to go forward. The more one looks at it, it appears the non-objection letter is a type of "extortion scheme" for TLDs, bad policy for a free and open Internet. And the policy wasn’t something that the GNSO actually approved in the last round. It was one of those post-approval board-staff "implementation details" that went off the rails due to intense govt pressure to ignore the GNSO-approved policy on the issue and give govts more power at ICANN anyway. The policy must be reconsidered for both of these reasons.
Best, Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 10:18 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> < Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Hi Jon I cannot speak for all 2000+ cities in Switzerland ;-) They have rights on their name but I guess that getting at a table with them would be fruitful. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Jon Nevett <jon@donuts.email> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 19:00:29 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <paul.rosenzweig@ redbranchconsulting.com>, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge:
Do you think that applicant should have to talk to the city and get a non-objection letter if the applicant was not using the TLD in a way at all related to the city? I don't have a problem with letters of non-objection in cases where the TLD is being targeted to the city population itself, but not in every instance. For example, in the case of Arch, Switzerland, do you think that the Swiss municipality should have veto rights on whether a group of architects could secure .ARCH to collect and display photos of interesting arches around the world or whether the Arch Insurance Co in New Jersey, US should be able to have a TLD for its network of brokers?
Thanks.
Jon
On May 4, 2018, at 12:48 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote:
Dear Paul That is probably a strange way of seeing things. The brand holder would have only an interest worth protecting if the string is used by someone else in commerce, in the same category of product or service, and consumer confusion is at stake. The city under Swiss law has a right to sue against the use of its name, without such strings attached, i.e. it is a more ample right. But again, what is key here is that the applicant needs to talk to the city with that very name and get at least its non-objection. Everything else is an invitation for protracted conflicts as we have seen in some cases NOT subject to this instrument... best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:04:30 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin><alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@ schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Yes, I understand the difference. But what gives one priority over the other. You are, in effect, arguing that the civil code of Switzerland should take precedence in our judgment to the trademark code of Great Britain, say. Indeed, to my mind the narrower more focused right should generally be thought of as taking precedence since it is less limiting of others.
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> < Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Sent: Friday, May To: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@ redbranchconsulting.com>; gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> < gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another?
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com
Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (<http://>www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><; http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><h ttp://www.lucernefoods.co<http://www.lucernefoods.co/> m<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/>>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/><http://lucernefoods.com<; http://lucernefoods.com/>> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/><http://www.lucerne.com<; http://www.lucerne.com/>> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://kom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch/>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point
(Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><; http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike @rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike @rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com><http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike @rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbau gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mik e@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbau gh.com<http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mi ke@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenb augh.com<http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<http://gmail.com><mailto:gregshat anipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inte r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com/><; http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.int er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.int er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<http://cann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgt ld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org<http://icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5- bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgt ld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto: alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexand er@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net
<mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto: dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net
<mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto: dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<http://g.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:l iz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au<mailto:iams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au<http://rg.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><mailto:liz. williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au<mailto:ams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<http://g.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:l iz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><mailto:liz. williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><; http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/>><ht tp://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Jorge: That's where our positions differ. Getting to a table where one party has veto power over the other in all cases regardless of usage is not a very fair or appropriate table. Jon
On May 4, 2018, at 1:18 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Hi Jon I cannot speak for all 2000+ cities in Switzerland ;-) They have rights on their name but I guess that getting at a table with them would be fruitful. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Jon Nevett <jon@donuts.email> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 19:00:29 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge:
Do you think that applicant should have to talk to the city and get a non-objection letter if the applicant was not using the TLD in a way at all related to the city? I don't have a problem with letters of non-objection in cases where the TLD is being targeted to the city population itself, but not in every instance. For example, in the case of Arch, Switzerland, do you think that the Swiss municipality should have veto rights on whether a group of architects could secure .ARCH to collect and display photos of interesting arches around the world or whether the Arch Insurance Co in New Jersey, US should be able to have a TLD for its network of brokers?
Thanks.
Jon
On May 4, 2018, at 12:48 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote:
Dear Paul That is probably a strange way of seeing things. The brand holder would have only an interest worth protecting if the string is used by someone else in commerce, in the same category of product or service, and consumer confusion is at stake. The city under Swiss law has a right to sue against the use of its name, without such strings attached, i.e. it is a more ample right. But again, what is key here is that the applicant needs to talk to the city with that very name and get at least its non-objection. Everything else is an invitation for protracted conflicts as we have seen in some cases NOT subject to this instrument... best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:04:30 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Yes, I understand the difference. But what gives one priority over the other. You are, in effect, arguing that the civil code of Switzerland should take precedence in our judgment to the trademark code of Great Britain, say. Indeed, to my mind the narrower more focused right should generally be thought of as taking precedence since it is less limiting of others.
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Sent: Friday, May To: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>; gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another?
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (<http://>www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/><http://www.lucernefoods.co<http://www.lucernefoods.co/> m<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com/>>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/><http://lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com/>> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/><http://www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com/>> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://kom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch/>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com><http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com<http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<http://gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<http://cann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org<http://icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<http://davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><; mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<http://g.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au<mailto:iams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au<http://rg.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au<mailto:ams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<http://g.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Jon, As has been mentioned many times before; the “intended use” is completely irrelevant on two levels: 1. The “intended use” is irrelevant for the registrants. They will use it for whatever they see fit. So yes: the registry can’t “market” it to the city. But then it is (sadly) mostly the REGISTRARS who do the marketing anyways. 2. But much more important: Once delegated a string is gone. So even if it were a closed brand registration – the harm is still existing: depriving the citizens of said city to identify themselves through the use of a gTLD. But I 100% agree with you, that the TRESHOULD for the letter of non-objection requirements should be overhauled. As you mentioned: it literally doesn’t make ANY sense that a place with less than X inhabitants (X to be defined in the PDP) can assume the power to decide the use of their city name. ESPECIALLY if it is a generic term. So we might want to have two thresholds: 1. A letter of non-objection is required if there is a city with identical name that has more than X inhabitants (X being for example 50,000 people; ALL cities with that name and more than X inhabitants have to provide such letter) 2. In case of the applied for string being identical to a “generic term” (“generic term” needs to be defined) the threshold is Y inhabitants (Y being for example 200,000 people) – so ONLY cities with more than Y inhabitants need to be looped in. This might leave a few smaller entities like Aspen out in the rain – but is reasonable fair and MUCH better than no protections AT ALL. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Jon Nevett [mailto:jon@donuts.email] Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 8:00 PM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Cc: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com; Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge: Do you think that applicant should have to talk to the city and get a non-objection letter if the applicant was not using the TLD in a way at all related to the city? I don't have a problem with letters of non-objection in cases where the TLD is being targeted to the city population itself, but not in every instance. For example, in the case of Arch, Switzerland, do you think that the Swiss municipality should have veto rights on whether a group of architects could secure .ARCH to collect and display photos of interesting arches around the world or whether the Arch Insurance Co in New Jersey, US should be able to have a TLD for its network of brokers? Thanks. Jon On May 4, 2018, at 12:48 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> > <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> > wrote: Dear Paul That is probably a strange way of seeing things. The brand holder would have only an interest worth protecting if the string is used by someone else in commerce, in the same category of product or service, and consumer confusion is at stake. The city under Swiss law has a right to sue against the use of its name, without such strings attached, i.e. it is a more ample right. But again, what is key here is that the applicant needs to talk to the city with that very name and get at least its non-objection. Everything else is an invitation for protracted conflicts as we have seen in some cases NOT subject to this instrument... best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul Rosenzweig < <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:04:30 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> gregshatanipc@gmail.com < <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> alexander@schubert.berlin< <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Yes, I understand the difference. But what gives one priority over the other. You are, in effect, arguing that the civil code of Switzerland should take precedence in our judgment to the trademark code of Great Britain, say. Indeed, to my mind the narrower more focused right should generally be thought of as taking precedence since it is less limiting of others. Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> > Sent: Friday, May To: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> ; gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> ; alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> > Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> >, alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> > Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> > Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> > On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> ; alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> > Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> > Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> > Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> > wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org <mailto:nces@icann.org> >] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (<http://> <http://www.lucernefoods.com/> www.lucernefoods.com< <http://www.lucernefoods.com/> http://www.lucernefoods.com<; <http://www.lucernefoods.co/> http://www.lucernefoods.co m< <http://www.lucernefoods.com/> http://www.lucernefoods.com>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have <http://lucernefoods.com/> lucernefoods.com< <http://lucernefoods.com/> http://lucernefoods.com> because <http://www.lucerne.com/> www.lucerne.com< <http://www.lucerne.com/> http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [ <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <http://kom.admin.ch/> http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams < <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> liz.williams@auda.org.au< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au <mailto:s@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au> <http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> <http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com <mailto:c@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net <http://ca.inter.net> >> <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <http://ca.inter.net> >>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com <http://France.com> <http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> <http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com <http://gh.com>
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com <mailto:c@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com <mailto:atanipc@gmail.com> >>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net <http://ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <http://ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> <http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch <http://om.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch <http://min.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch> >>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com <http://gh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com <http://odenbaugh.com>
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com <http://augh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch <http://om.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch <http://min.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch> >>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com <mailto:c@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com <mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>
<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com <http://il.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <http://gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com <mailto:ipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net <http://ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net <http://r.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net <http://nter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net <http://ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com <http://city.com> <http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com <http://city.com%3chttp:/city.com/%3e%3e> <http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> <http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch <http://om.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch <http://min.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <http://bakom.admin.ch> >>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org <mailto:nces@icann.org>
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org <mailto:unces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org <mailto:ounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <http://ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net <http://er.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net <http://inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net <mailto:l@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <http://ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net <http://er.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net <http://inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net <mailto:l@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org <http://ann.org>
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org <http://cann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org <http://icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> >>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin
<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org <mailto:nces@icann.org>
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org <mailto:unces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net <http://davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net <http://davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>
<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net <http://davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net <http://davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au <mailto:ms@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au <http://g.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au <mailto:iams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au <http://rg.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <http://auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au <mailto:s@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au <mailto:ams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au <http://g.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au <http://auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au> <http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au <http://auda.org.au> <http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Alexander, It is your opinion that "intended use" or "context" is irrelevant -- not a fact. In my view (and the view of many others), intended use/context is both relevant and critically important. Words have multiple meanings, and different parties can have legitimate interests in a string based on different intended uses of that string. If intended use/context doesn't matter, then everyone with a legitimate interest in the string should be in the same pool, regardless of intended use. If that's the case, each legitimate interest-holder should have to seek "support or non-objection" from each other legitimate interest-holder. We would then need to define who is a legitimate rights-holder for a given string, among the relevant brandowners, governments, communities, etc. (surname-holders? innovators?) And define what a legitimate right is (or isn't), and define a hierarchy of rights. To deal with your specific arguments about why "intended use" should be irrelevant: *1. The “intended use” is irrelevant for the registrants. They will use it for whatever they see fit. So yes: the registry can’t “market” it to the city. But then it is (sadly) mostly the REGISTRARS who do the marketing anyways.* This is untrue. For a .brand, the intended use dictates who the registrants may be (or it may be that the only registrant is the registry) and how they can use a second level domains. For a special-purpose or restricted TLD (e.g., .bank), the registrants must be of a certain type (e.g., a properly licensed bank) and can only use the domain for specific purposes (e.g., banking-related activities), and perhaps in certain ways (e.g., specified security measures). For a geo or a community, there will be different set of context-based limitations. The Registrars can only market a second-level domain within the restrictions imposed by the registry -- so a "non-geo" TLD that could also have been a geo-TLD could be restricted from uses related to the geo-purpose. Of course, there may be TLDs where there is no context and the registrants can use their domains for whatever they see fit (e.g., .xyz). We can ponder that particular case, and whether it matters if the registry or registrar is "allowed" to market it to inhabitants of given locales.. *2. But much more important: Once delegated a string is gone. So even if it were a closed brand registration – the harm is still existing: depriving the citizens of said city to identify themselves through the use of a gTLD.* The basic statement is obviously true ("Once delegated a string is gone"), subject to some of the discussions on string-sharing that have cropped up recently. But this is a feature, not a bug. There can be multiple applicants, and countless potential applicants, for any gTLD -- only one will prevail. All of the other applicants, their potential registrants and the potential end-users who would visit those domains are "harmed" in each instance. On the other hand, there can be substitutes, variations and options of all types if one string is not available. As a general matter, we should favor applicants over non-applicants -- the right to potentially use or register under a given TLD should not trump an applicant's attempt to actually use and offer registration under a given TLD. Of course, these "harms" exist between geos as well as between geos and non-geos: if one Springfield is delegated that TLD, the resident of every other Springfield is "harmed." The good people of Berlin, Connecticut (not far from where I went to college) are "harmed" by the .Berlin geoTLD. When we start handing out veto rights to one type of rights-holder, we are creating a whole series of problems, while "solving" one in favor of that one preferred type of rights-holder. So, in your theory, intended use is actually incredibly relevant. Where a TLD can *potentially* be used in the context of a geoTLD, then that intended use is given superior rights to all other intended uses. It's only *every other* "intended use" that is irrelevant. Or, if not irrelevant, inferior. This hierarchy goes further, privileging non-applicants over applicants regardless of the applicants' legitimate rights. (As noted before, the opposite is true for every other "competition" between rights-holders -- applicants are favored over non-applicants, and the exercise of rights to get a TLD prevails over the exercises of rights to block a TLD. Community applicants do prevail over non-community applicants, but that is a very narrowly prescribed right, with significant hurdle -- and non-applicants won't prevail over applicants (at most, they can cause the loss of a community designation.)) If we are going to even consider establishing any hierarchies, and particularly if we are looking to privilege and empower certain non-applicants to block applicants, we need to be very selective, very narrow, very deliberate, very clear and very consistent in our standards. Simply saying "geos win" is not going to cut it. Greg On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 12:57 PM, Alexander Schubert < alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote:
Dear Jon,
As has been mentioned many times before; the “intended use” is completely irrelevant on two levels:
1. The “intended use” is irrelevant for the registrants. They will use it for whatever they see fit. So yes: the registry can’t “market” it to the city. But then it is (sadly) mostly the REGISTRARS who do the marketing anyways.
2. But much more important: Once delegated a string is gone. So even if it were a closed brand registration – the harm is still existing: depriving the citizens of said city to identify themselves through the use of a gTLD.
But I 100% agree with you, that the TRESHOULD for the letter of non-objection requirements should be overhauled. As you mentioned: it literally doesn’t make ANY sense that a place with less than X inhabitants (X to be defined in the PDP) can assume the power to decide the use of their city name. ESPECIALLY if it is a generic term. So we might want to have two thresholds:
1. A letter of non-objection is required if there is a city with identical name that has more than X inhabitants (X being for example 50,000 people; ALL cities with that name and more than X inhabitants have to provide such letter)
2. In case of the applied for string being identical to a “generic term” (“generic term” needs to be defined) the threshold is Y inhabitants (Y being for example 200,000 people) – so ONLY cities with more than Y inhabitants need to be looped in.
This might leave a few smaller entities like Aspen out in the rain – but is reasonable fair and MUCH better than no protections AT ALL.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
*From:* Jon Nevett [mailto:jon@donuts.email] *Sent:* Friday, May 04, 2018 8:00 PM *To:* Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch *Cc:* paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com; Greg Shatan < gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge:
Do you think that applicant should have to talk to the city and get a non-objection letter if the applicant was not using the TLD in a way at all related to the city? I don't have a problem with letters of non-objection in cases where the TLD is being targeted to the city population itself, but not in every instance. For example, in the case of Arch, Switzerland, do you think that the Swiss municipality should have veto rights on whether a group of architects could secure .ARCH to collect and display photos of interesting arches around the world or whether the Arch Insurance Co in New Jersey, US should be able to have a TLD for its network of brokers?
Thanks.
Jon
On May 4, 2018, at 12:48 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> < Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Paul That is probably a strange way of seeing things. The brand holder would have only an interest worth protecting if the string is used by someone else in commerce, in the same category of product or service, and consumer confusion is at stake. The city under Swiss law has a right to sue against the use of its name, without such strings attached, i.e. it is a more ample right. But again, what is key here is that the applicant needs to talk to the city with that very name and get at least its non-objection. Everything else is an invitation for protracted conflicts as we have seen in some cases NOT subject to this instrument... best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:04:30 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexande r@schubert.berlin<alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Yes, I understand the difference. But what gives one priority over the other. You are, in effect, arguing that the civil code of Switzerland should take precedence in our judgment to the trademark code of Great Britain, say. Indeed, to my mind the narrower more focused right should generally be thought of as taking precedence since it is less limiting of others.
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Friday, May To: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com; gregshatanipc@gmail.com; alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another?
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com; alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (<http://>www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<h ttp://www.lucernefoods.co m<http://www.lucernefoods.com>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> <http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> <http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><m ailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>,
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> <http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>< mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>< mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com><ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co <mike@rodenbaugh.co> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com <mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>< mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>< mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>
; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte <mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i <mmoll@ca.i> nter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<; http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>> <http://city.com%3chttp:/city.com/%3e%3e>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> <http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>< mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>< mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5- bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.or <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.o <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o> rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int <mmoll@ca.int>
er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int <mmoll@ca.int>
er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>< mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>
<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>< mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto
:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5- bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>><mailto: dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net><mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>>>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net><m ailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>><mailto: dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net><mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net><ma ilto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net <dave@davecake.net>>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or <liz.williams@auda.or> g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>>< mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.o <liz.williams@auda.o> rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>< mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the
largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org <liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>>< mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or <liz.williams@auda.or> g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>< mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><; http://www. auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Jorge, I don’t see how your argument wins. Any right to “Luzern" that the Swiss govt has ends at its border. These are not international laws you refer to and do not apply outside of the country enacted and thus there is no legal or rational basis for imposing them on the entire world. These laws do not apply to anyone outside of Switzerland (the same way a TM right is limited in scope and geographically). Why do govts think they get to throw out all other legitimate interests (and in some cases internationally recognized legal rights like TM and free speech) and impose a national law on the entire world? That isn’t how the law works, so why should ICANN adopt such a radical approach? Saying “there is only string” doesn’t prove entitlement to anything. Thanks, Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 8:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another?
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com; alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin
<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
+1 Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 12:02 PM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Cc: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>; Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Jorge, I dont see how your argument wins. Any right to Luzern" that the Swiss govt has ends at its border. These are not international laws you refer to and do not apply outside of the country enacted and thus there is no legal or rational basis for imposing them on the entire world. These laws do not apply to anyone outside of Switzerland (the same way a TM right is limited in scope and geographically). Why do govts think they get to throw out all other legitimate interests (and in some cases internationally recognized legal rights like TM and free speech) and impose a national law on the entire world? That isnt how the law works, so why should ICANN adopt such a radical approach? Saying there is only string doesnt prove entitlement to anything. Thanks, Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 8:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another?
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com; alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a right to exclude. Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a likelihood of confusion basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the natural zone of expansion. Im not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America but NOT for LUCERNE! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string lucerne - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. Its rather the services and goods that you protect FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that governments think the rights of governments come first it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
nces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesnt make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. Lucerne Foods has no right on Lucerne it most probably just has a trademark for lucerne foods in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (Lucerne as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource .lucerne.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a citys name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the intended use. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.co m<http://www.lucernefoods.com>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
Sandwich may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the use is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the city name would be delegated. Think on .shanghai delegated for a non geo-use. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if .luzern were to be applied for, intending a non-geo use, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the jurisdiction Subgroup of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence ).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not object.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to allow bad policy to chase poor implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express objection to something. I would like to see the end of the non-objection process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they dont want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you dont object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point
[mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou 3.
(Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E:
liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william
s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh
<mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<
mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM,
<Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg
e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh
<mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<
mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM
<Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg
e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan
<gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip
c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>,
mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail
to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>
<mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai
lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>,
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
<gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM,
<Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg
e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca
ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@
bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh
<mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<
mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau
gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM
<Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg
e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca
ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@
bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan
<gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip
c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<
mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh
atanipc@gmail.com>>>>,
mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail
to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>
<mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai
lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>,
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>
<gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM,
<Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg
e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca
ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@
bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak
om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad
min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.
ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma
ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh
[mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau
gh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r
odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail
to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co
m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb
augh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM
<Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg
e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca
ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@
bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak
om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad
min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.
ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma
ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan
<gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip
c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<
mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh
atanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma
il.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail
to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan
ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>;
mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail
to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte
r.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i
nter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll
@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>;
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns
o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their"
<city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com
/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM,
<Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg
e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca
ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@
bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak
om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad
min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.
ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma
ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City insurances, City salami, City whatever ) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
[mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou
nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new
gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo
unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-
newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or
g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b
ounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-
newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o
rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll
<mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai
lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int
er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.
inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol
l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5
<gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll
<mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai
lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int
er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.
inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol
l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
<gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic
ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg
-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto
:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i
cann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl
d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai
lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces
@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl
d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai
lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert
<alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander
@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube
rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin
<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns
o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: ..but a first right based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise important) cities:
Nobody has a first right obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) I think we do not have to search for international law; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to some entity but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a sense of common good OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about minor geographical entities such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: .new and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve protection from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
[mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou
nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new
gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo
unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake
<dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto
:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail
to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m
ailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>
<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net
<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
<gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto
:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake
<dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto
:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail
to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma
ilto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><
mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<
mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like capital is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams
<liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia
ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or
g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto
:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will
iams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o
rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai
lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the success of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a is the word a capital city question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we dont have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I dont recommend letters of support or non-objection. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E:
liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william
s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org
.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:
liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi
ams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or
g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail
to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>
www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.
auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns
o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns
o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns
o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns
o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns
o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Robin ICANN has to respect local applicable law. Besides, I guess that we may set aside now the notion that these are „fantasy laws“... But the broad point is, as said, that we have different actors with interests converging on a unique string. City governments have responsibilities for the people represented by that name, and at least in Switzerland have a strong right on the name as such. The non-objection rule gets applicants in touch with the city govts, and as we have heard so far with many success stories and geoTLDs up and running. I guess it is disingenuous to think that city govts may just be circumvented. The political issues would come back with a vengeance later and create many problems for ICANN, the applicant, the peoples of auch cities etc - nothing positive for sure. Just ignoring such political sensitivities is just myopic... Especially when we have a tool that gets people together and has worked well in many cases. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:02:11 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Cc: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Jorge, I don’t see how your argument wins. Any right to “Luzern" that the Swiss govt has ends at its border. These are not international laws you refer to and do not apply outside of the country enacted and thus there is no legal or rational basis for imposing them on the entire world. These laws do not apply to anyone outside of Switzerland (the same way a TM right is limited in scope and geographically). Why do govts think they get to throw out all other legitimate interests (and in some cases internationally recognized legal rights like TM and free speech) and impose a national law on the entire world? That isn’t how the law works, so why should ICANN adopt such a radical approach? Saying “there is only string” doesn’t prove entitlement to anything. Thanks, Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 8:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another?
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com; alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com>>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin
<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Jorge, Political issues will come back with a vengeance? We need to keep ICANN OUT of political disputes, not invite them in via a TLD program where “sensitivities” without any basis in international law trump everything else, including including internationally recognized legal rights. That is why international law must be our basis, not conflicting national laws that apply no where outside the territory. But I am curious about this threat: just what "political issues will come back with a vengeance later and create problems for ICANN, etc.”? The two US states that I’ve lived in contain places called “Lucerne”. There is small town called Lucerne, Michigan not far from where I grew up, and there is Lucerne Valley in California. Swiss law had no authority to stop those communities from choosing that name and it has no authority to prevent those communities (or others) from choosing that TLD either. The fact that there is a law in Switzerland is irrelevant outside of Switzerland. ICANN should not be in the business of inviting political disputes into the DNS. Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 9:40 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Robin
ICANN has to respect local applicable law.
Besides, I guess that we may set aside now the notion that these are „fantasy laws“...
But the broad point is, as said, that we have different actors with interests converging on a unique string.
City governments have responsibilities for the people represented by that name, and at least in Switzerland have a strong right on the name as such.
The non-objection rule gets applicants in touch with the city govts, and as we have heard so far with many success stories and geoTLDs up and running.
I guess it is disingenuous to think that city govts may just be circumvented. The political issues would come back with a vengeance later and create many problems for ICANN, the applicant, the peoples of auch cities etc - nothing positive for sure. Just ignoring such political sensitivities is just myopic... Especially when we have a tool that gets people together and has worked well in many cases.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:02:11 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Cc: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Jorge,
I don’t see how your argument wins. Any right to “Luzern" that the Swiss govt has ends at its border. These are not international laws you refer to and do not apply outside of the country enacted and thus there is no legal or rational basis for imposing them on the entire world. These laws do not apply to anyone outside of Switzerland (the same way a TM right is limited in scope and geographically). Why do govts think they get to throw out all other legitimate interests (and in some cases internationally recognized legal rights like TM and free speech) and impose a national law on the entire world? That isn’t how the law works, so why should ICANN adopt such a radical approach? Saying “there is only string” doesn’t prove entitlement to anything.
Thanks, Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 8:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another?
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com; alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com>>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin
<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Robin Under the current rules the applicant would need the non-objection of all „lucernes“... there is no priority as far as I know. Ignoring political realities is a bad recipee for practical solutions. Names, geographic names, have political, cultural and other connotations. That is just a fact of life... what I‘m describing are some factual aspects, reminding ourselves of the issues that have been created with strings that were not subject to the non-objection rule and which fill many pages of IRP pleadings etc. I for one would like to avoid such issues as far as possible. That means engaging all interested parties. And that was fruitfully done with the non-objection instrument. And ICANN is bound to respect local applicable law. That‘s also a fact. As to international law: I thought we were here to develop multistakeholder policies, for the global public interest. Policies build on applicable law, and have to respect it, but go beyond it - that is what we are here for... best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:56:11 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Jorge, Political issues will come back with a vengeance? We need to keep ICANN OUT of political disputes, not invite them in via a TLD program where “sensitivities” without any basis in international law trump everything else, including including internationally recognized legal rights. That is why international law must be our basis, not conflicting national laws that apply no where outside the territory. But I am curious about this threat: just what "political issues will come back with a vengeance later and create problems for ICANN, etc.”? The two US states that I’ve lived in contain places called “Lucerne”. There is small town called Lucerne, Michigan not far from where I grew up, and there is Lucerne Valley in California. Swiss law had no authority to stop those communities from choosing that name and it has no authority to prevent those communities (or others) from choosing that TLD either. The fact that there is a law in Switzerland is irrelevant outside of Switzerland. ICANN should not be in the business of inviting political disputes into the DNS. Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 9:40 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Robin
ICANN has to respect local applicable law.
Besides, I guess that we may set aside now the notion that these are „fantasy laws“...
But the broad point is, as said, that we have different actors with interests converging on a unique string.
City governments have responsibilities for the people represented by that name, and at least in Switzerland have a strong right on the name as such.
The non-objection rule gets applicants in touch with the city govts, and as we have heard so far with many success stories and geoTLDs up and running.
I guess it is disingenuous to think that city govts may just be circumvented. The political issues would come back with a vengeance later and create many problems for ICANN, the applicant, the peoples of auch cities etc - nothing positive for sure. Just ignoring such political sensitivities is just myopic... Especially when we have a tool that gets people together and has worked well in many cases.
best
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 18:02:11 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Cc: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Jorge,
I don’t see how your argument wins. Any right to “Luzern" that the Swiss govt has ends at its border. These are not international laws you refer to and do not apply outside of the country enacted and thus there is no legal or rational basis for imposing them on the entire world. These laws do not apply to anyone outside of Switzerland (the same way a TM right is limited in scope and geographically). Why do govts think they get to throw out all other legitimate interests (and in some cases internationally recognized legal rights like TM and free speech) and impose a national law on the entire world? That isn’t how the law works, so why should ICANN adopt such a radical approach? Saying “there is only string” doesn’t prove entitlement to anything.
Thanks, Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 8:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another?
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com; alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com>>>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com />><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces @icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin
<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m ailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>> <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www. auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Robin, Could all the layers here just for a SECOND take off your lawyers hat? The world is not only regulated by "laws". And we are working off the 2012 AGB - which has the letter of non-objection requirement embedded. If we wanted to strip that requirement off the 2012 AGB: we would need some justification. And I don't see any brought forward as of now. Again: Local TLDs are immensely important for the affiliated constituents - as we see with ccTLDs! Half of all nations in the world are SMALLER than Berlin (3.5 Million people). ALL of these nations -(many, many of them smallish entities like Latvia or Estonia = 2 Million, 1.3 Million people) are INSANELY dependent on their ccTLD. Cities are becoming more and more important. Once having a certain size a city is as important as a country. So the PEOPLE IN THAT CITY (not their "Government") have an INHERENT RIGHT to express themselves with "their" city gTLD. I think it all hinges on finding a good balance as to when a city is "large enough" that a sizeable amount of people would be deprived of their right to express themselves with "their" gTLD. 50,000 people? 100k? I do agree: if a place has only 10k people - the "damage" (not requiring a letter of non-objection) is minor - and it is unlikely that they ever WANTED to have one (not feasible in 99.9% of all cases). Thanks, Alexander -----Original Message----- From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin@ipjustice.org] Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 7:02 PM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Cc: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>; Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; alexander@schubert.berlin Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Jorge, I don’t see how your argument wins. Any right to “Luzern" that the Swiss govt has ends at its border. These are not international laws you refer to and do not apply outside of the country enacted and thus there is no legal or rational basis for imposing them on the entire world. These laws do not apply to anyone outside of Switzerland (the same way a TM right is limited in scope and geographically). Why do govts think they get to throw out all other legitimate interests (and in some cases internationally recognized legal rights like TM and free speech) and impose a national law on the entire world? That isn’t how the law works, so why should ICANN adopt such a radical approach? Saying “there is only string” doesn’t prove entitlement to anything. Thanks, Robin
On May 4, 2018, at 8:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Paul The difference, being simple, is that a trademark gives you a limited protection regarding a term for certain products and services, when there might be a confusion for consumers (Nick from Nominet explained it much better). The right under the civil code on the name of a city is general in its scope, not limited to commercial issues, not limited to specific products and services and not focused on consumer protection. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 17:27:55 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Why is it qualitatively different? And if it is qualitatively different what body of law gives one type of right priority over another?
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:54 AM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com; alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
nces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.co m<http://www.lucernefoods.com>>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point
[mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou 3.
(Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E:
liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william
s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh
<mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<
mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM,
<Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg
e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh
<mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<
mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM
<Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg
e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan
<gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip
c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>,
mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail
to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>
<mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai
lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>,
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
<gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM,
<Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg
e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca
ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@
bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh
<mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<
mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau
gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM
<Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg
e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca
ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@
bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan
<gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip
c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<
mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh
atanipc@gmail.com>>>>,
mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail
to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>
<mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai
lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>,
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>
<gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM,
<Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg
e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca
ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@
bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak
om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad
min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.
ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma
ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh
[mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau
gh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r
odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail
to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co
m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb
augh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM
<Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg
e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca
ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@
bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak
om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad
min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.
ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma
ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan
<gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip
c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<
mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh
atanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma
il.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail
to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan
ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>;
mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail
to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte
r.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i
nter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll
@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>;
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns
o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their"
<city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com
/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM,
<Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg
e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca
ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@
bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak
om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad
min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.
ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma
ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
[mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou
nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new
gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo
unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-
newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or
g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b
ounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-
newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o
rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll
<mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai
lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int
er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.
inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol
l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5
<gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll
<mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai
lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int
er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.
inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol
l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
<gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic
ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg
-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto
:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i
cann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtl
d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mai
lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces
@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtl
d-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mai
lto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert
<alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander
@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schube
rt.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin
<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto :alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns
o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
[mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou
nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new
gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo
unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake
<dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto
:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail
to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<m
ailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>
<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net
<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
<gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto
:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake
<dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto
:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail
to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma
ilto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><
mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<
mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams
<liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia
ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or
g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto
:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will
iams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o
rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai
lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E:
liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william
s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org
.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:
liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi
ams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or
g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail
to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>
www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.
auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns
o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns
o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns
o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns
o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns
o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G
nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Jorge, Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)? Thanks, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> < mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com< http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com< http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><; http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto: alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto: dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net
<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto: dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net
<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto: dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><; http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect? On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Jorge,
Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)?
Thanks,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> < mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com< http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com< http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><; http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto: dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net
<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto: dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net
<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto: dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><; http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect? On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> wrote: Jorge, Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)? Thanks, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://kom.admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect? On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> wrote: Jorge, Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think its different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think its superior (assuming you do)? Thanks, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a right to exclude. Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a likelihood of confusion basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the natural zone of expansion. Im not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America but NOT for LUCERNE! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string lucerne - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. Its rather the services and goods that you protect FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that governments think the rights of governments come first it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesnt make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. Lucerne Foods has no right on Lucerne it most probably just has a trademark for lucerne foods in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (Lucerne as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource .lucerne. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a citys name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the intended use. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregs hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, Sandwich may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the use is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the city name would be delegated. Think on .shanghai delegated for a non geo-use. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if .luzern were to be applied for, intending a non-geo use, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the jurisdiction Subgroup of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence ). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregs hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><http://kom. admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not object. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to allow bad policy to chase poor implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express objection to something. I would like to see the end of the non-objection process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they dont want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you dont object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz . Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike @rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jo rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Canci o@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b akom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom. admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi n.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>
wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau gh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:m ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@r odenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jo rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Canci o@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b akom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom. admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi n.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>
Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma il.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail. com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gr egshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@ gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmai l.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte r.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.i nter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto :mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><m ailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.ne t<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@c a.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net>>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.co m<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jo rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Canci o@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b akom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom. admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi n.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>
wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City insurances, City salami, City whatever ) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w t5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann .org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w t5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailt o:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n et<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.in ter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmo ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailt o:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n et<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.in ter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmo ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mail to:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mail to:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander @schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert .berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berli n><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailt o:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexand er@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schu bert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berl in<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailt o:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexand er@schubert.berlin>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: ..but a first right based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise important) cities: Nobody has a first right obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) I think we do not have to search for international law; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to some entity but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a sense of common good OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about minor geographical entities such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: .new and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve protection from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake. net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecak e.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecak e.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@dave cake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@dav ecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<ma ilto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.n et><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake .net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake .net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davec ake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@dave cake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like capital is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.will iams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@au da.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au< mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz. williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@ auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:l iz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the success of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a is the word a capital city question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we dont have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I dont recommend letters of support or non-objection. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz . Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.willi ams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.w illiams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@aud a.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<m ailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.w illiams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@a uda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:li z.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.aud a.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Hi Jorge, Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article: "Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction." Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech. Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks! Best, Paul On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig < paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect?
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> wrote: Jorge,
Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)?
Thanks,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregs hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http:// www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregs hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>< http://kom. admin.ch>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><; http://www.a uda.org.au>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike @rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbau gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike @rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbau gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshat anipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike @rodenbaugh.com< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbau gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike @rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.co m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshat anipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:g regshatanipc@gma il.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com
<mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inte r.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.i nter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jo rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Canci o@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@b akom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom. admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom.admi n.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>
wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbau gh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@r odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mi ke@rodenbaugh.co m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenb augh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:m ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike@r odenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike @rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jo rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Canci o@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@b akom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom. admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom.admi n.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>
Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanip c@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshat anipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregsh atanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:g regshatanipc@gma il.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:greg shatanipc@gmail. com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gr egshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@ gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com < mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gr egshatanipc@gmai l.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inte r.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.i nter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto :mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <m ailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.ne t<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.int er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto: mmoll@c a.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmol l@ca.inter.net>>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com/><; http://city.co m<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Ca ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bak om.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad min.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jo rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Canci o@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@b akom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom. admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom.admi n.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>
wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5- bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-w t5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5-bounces@icann .org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-w t5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org
<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailt o:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net < mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.n et<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.in ter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto: mmoll@ ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmo ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmol l@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailt o:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net
< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.n et<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.in ter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto: mmoll@ ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmo ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5-bounces@ic ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg -wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i cann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org
<mail to:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mail to:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto: gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5- bounces@icann.or g<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto: alexander @schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:al exander@schubert .berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexand er@schubert.berli n><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin
<mailt o:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto: alexand er@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto: alexander@schu bert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexan der@schubert.berl in<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailt o:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto: alexand er@schubert.berlin>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bou nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-new gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5- bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5-bo unces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.or g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-b ounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.o rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net
<mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <ma ilto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net
< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto: dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake. net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto: dave@davecak e.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecak e.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto: dave@dave cake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@dav ecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto :dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net
<mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <ma ilto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net
< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto: dave@davecake.net< mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake.n et><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto: dave@davecake .net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@davecake .net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto: dave@davec ake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto: dave@dave cake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.willia ms@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.or g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.will iams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:li z.williams@auda.o rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au
<mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto: liz. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@au da.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz. williams@auda.org.au< mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz. williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@ auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:li z.williams@auda.org.au
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:l iz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.william s@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.willi ams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:li z.williams@auda.or g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au
<mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto: liz.w illiams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@aud a.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <m ailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.w illiams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@a uda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:li z.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: li z.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><; http://www.a uda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><; http://www.aud a.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gnso -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: Gn so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:G nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Paul Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows. Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows. These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities. And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws. Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right. But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided... Best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Jorge, Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article: "Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction." Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech. Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks! Best, Paul On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect? On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> wrote: Jorge, Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)? Thanks, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><http://kom. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb> augh.com<http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail>. com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gr<mailto:gr> egshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:egshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@<mailto:gregshatanipc@> gmail.com<http://gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><; mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmai<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmai> l.com<http://l.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto :mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><m ailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ailto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.ne<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.ne> t<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@c<mailto:mmoll@c> a.inter.net<http://a.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net>>>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso<mailto:gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.co m<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo> unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o> rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w> t5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:t5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann> .org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w> t5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:t5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailt o:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:o%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n> et<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.in<mailto:mmoll@ca.in> ter.net<http://ter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@<mailto:mmoll@> ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmo<mailto:mmo> ll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailt o:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:o%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n> et<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.in<mailto:mmoll@ca.in> ter.net<http://ter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@<mailto:mmoll@> ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmo<mailto:mmo> ll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i> cann.org<http://cann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld<mailto:gnso-newgtld> -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mail to:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:to%3Agnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@> icann.org<http://icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld<mailto:gnso-newgtld> -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mail to:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:to%3Agnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander<mailto:alexander> @schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert<mailto:alexander@schubert> .berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berli<mailto:alexander@schubert.berli> n><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailt o:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexand<mailto:alexand> er@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schu<mailto:alexander@schu> bert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berl<mailto:alexander@schubert.berl> in<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailt o:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexand<mailto:alexand> er@schubert.berlin>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso<mailto:gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo> unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o> rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:to%3Adave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:ilto%3Adave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake>. net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecak<mailto:dave@davecak> e.net<http://e.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecak<mailto:dave@davecak> e.net<http://e.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@dave<mailto:dave@dave> cake.net<http://cake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@dav<mailto:dave@dav> ecake.net<http://ecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:to%3Adave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:ilto%3Adave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.n<mailto:dave@davecake.n> et><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake> .net<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake> .net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davec<mailto:dave@davec> ake.net<http://ake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@dave<mailto:dave@dave> cake.net<http://cake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or> g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.will<mailto:liz.will> iams@auda.org.au<mailto:iams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.o<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o> rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:lto%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz<mailto:liz>. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@au<mailto:liz.williams@au> da.org.au<http://da.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><; mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz<mailto:liz>. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@<mailto:liz.williams@> auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:l<mailto:l> iz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:iz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willi<mailto:liz.willi> ams@auda.org.au<mailto:ams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or> g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:to%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz.w<mailto:liz.w> illiams@auda.org.au<mailto:illiams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@aud<mailto:liz.williams@aud> a.org.au<http://a.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><m ailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:ailto%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.w<mailto:liz.w> illiams@auda.org.au<mailto:illiams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@a<mailto:liz.williams@a> uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:li<mailto:li> z.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:z.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au/<http://uda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.aud a.org.au/<http://a.org.au/>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
I forgot to refer to the Email from Ghislain de Salins who makes some very pertinent points and also references to some recent French case-law. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Datum: 10. Mai 2018 um 07:36:05 MESZ An: mcgradygnso@gmail.com <mcgradygnso@gmail.com>, paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Paul Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows. Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows. These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities. And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws. Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right. But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided... Best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Jorge, Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article: "Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction." Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech. Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks! Best, Paul On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect? On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> wrote: Jorge, Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)? Thanks, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com>><http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><http://kom. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb> augh.com<http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail>. com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gr<mailto:gr> egshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:egshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@<mailto:gregshatanipc@> gmail.com<http://gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><; mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmai<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmai> l.com<http://l.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto :mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><m ailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ailto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.ne<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.ne> t<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@c<mailto:mmoll@c> a.inter.net<http://a.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net>>>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso<mailto:gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.co m<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo> unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o> rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w> t5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:t5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann> .org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w> t5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:t5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailt o:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:o%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n> et<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.in<mailto:mmoll@ca.in> ter.net<http://ter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@<mailto:mmoll@> ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmo<mailto:mmo> ll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailt o:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:o%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n> et<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.in<mailto:mmoll@ca.in> ter.net<http://ter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@<mailto:mmoll@> ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmo<mailto:mmo> ll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i> cann.org<http://cann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld<mailto:gnso-newgtld> -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mail to:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:to%3Agnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@> icann.org<http://icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld<mailto:gnso-newgtld> -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mail to:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:to%3Agnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander<mailto:alexander> @schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert<mailto:alexander@schubert> .berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berli<mailto:alexander@schubert.berli> n><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailt o:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexand<mailto:alexand> er@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schu<mailto:alexander@schu> bert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berl<mailto:alexander@schubert.berl> in<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailt o:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexand<mailto:alexand> er@schubert.berlin>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso<mailto:gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo> unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o> rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:to%3Adave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:ilto%3Adave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake>. net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecak<mailto:dave@davecak> e.net<http://e.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecak<mailto:dave@davecak> e.net<http://e.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@dave<mailto:dave@dave> cake.net<http://cake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@dav<mailto:dave@dav> ecake.net<http://ecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:to%3Adave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:ilto%3Adave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.n<mailto:dave@davecake.n> et><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake> .net<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake> .net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davec<mailto:dave@davec> ake.net<http://ake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@dave<mailto:dave@dave> cake.net<http://cake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or> g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.will<mailto:liz.will> iams@auda.org.au<mailto:iams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.o<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o> rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:lto%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz<mailto:liz>. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@au<mailto:liz.williams@au> da.org.au<http://da.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><; mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz<mailto:liz>. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@<mailto:liz.williams@> auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:l<mailto:l> iz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:iz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willi<mailto:liz.willi> ams@auda.org.au<mailto:ams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or> g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:to%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz.w<mailto:liz.w> illiams@auda.org.au<mailto:illiams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@aud<mailto:liz.williams@aud> a.org.au<http://a.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><m ailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:ailto%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.w<mailto:liz.w> illiams@auda.org.au<mailto:illiams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@a<mailto:liz.williams@a> uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:li<mailto:li> z.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:z.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au/<http://uda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.aud a.org.au/<http://a.org.au/>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Apart from the French case mentioned by Ghislain, you may find this German ruling interesting from 1999, which has inspired other cases (also in Switzerland): http://www.bettinger.de/en/infothek/domainrecht-a-z/domainrecht-urteile-und-... <http://www.bettinger.de/en/infothek/domainrecht-a-z/domainrecht-urteile-und-beschluesse/badwildbad-com/>(in German) Another interesting, Swiss, case is based on Art 29 ZGB (in French): https://www.bger.ch/ext/eurospider/live/fr/php/clir/http/index.php?lang=fr&t... As said, all this just reflects that city governments have an interest on their denomination, which at least in some countries are backed by the kind of rights existing in France, Germany or small Switzerland... In other countries these interests may have a different legal form, be based on public policy or in limits (as also exist in Switzerland) against monopolizing business names or trademarks composed solely by such geographic names (eg to register „lucerne“ instead of „lucerne foods“)... What is key is to get such public authorities at the table before the application runs too far, the applicant invests much money, because if the public authority is left aside it may come in later and there may be a protracted, costly conflict that benefits no one. The letter of non-objection avoids such unfortunate situations and ensures that the public authorities are OK with the application and gives a much better level of certainty to the applicant. In cultures, like apparently some anglosaxon countries (where up to now as far as I see almost all critics to the non-objection framework of the 2012 AGB are coming from), if public authorities have no policy nor legal interests in their name the process of obtaining non-objection letters should be very swift, as public authorities are bound by the rule of law and would naturally not have anything to object prima facie... And that is one perfectly possible approach under the non-objetion system. At the same time that system allows that other policy/legal cultures that have more affirmative interests on the names of geographic entities are also well served, because, as said, the relevant public authorities are made aware in a timely fashion of the application and are brought to a table. The result may also be laisser faire, or it may mean participating in governance or setting some shared rules. I hope this might help for our common understanding and remind us that ICANN sets policies for the global DNS, with solutions that best fit all interested parties worldwide. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Datum: 10. Mai 2018 um 07:41:52 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, mcgradygnso@gmail.com <mcgradygnso@gmail.com>, paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I forgot to refer to the Email from Ghislain de Salins who makes some very pertinent points and also references to some recent French case-law. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Datum: 10. Mai 2018 um 07:36:05 MESZ An: mcgradygnso@gmail.com <mcgradygnso@gmail.com>, paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Paul Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows. Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows. These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities. And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws. Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right. But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided... Best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Jorge, Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article: "Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction." Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech. Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks! Best, Paul On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect? On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> wrote: Jorge, Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)? Thanks, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com>><http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><http://kom. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb> augh.com<http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail>. com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gr<mailto:gr> egshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:egshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@<mailto:gregshatanipc@> gmail.com<http://gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><; mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmai<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmai> l.com<http://l.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto :mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><m ailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ailto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.ne<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.ne> t<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@c<mailto:mmoll@c> a.inter.net<http://a.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net>>>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso<mailto:gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.co m<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo> unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o> rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w> t5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:t5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann> .org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w> t5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:t5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailt o:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:o%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n> et<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.in<mailto:mmoll@ca.in> ter.net<http://ter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@<mailto:mmoll@> ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmo<mailto:mmo> ll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailt o:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:o%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n> et<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.in<mailto:mmoll@ca.in> ter.net<http://ter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@<mailto:mmoll@> ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmo<mailto:mmo> ll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i> cann.org<http://cann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld<mailto:gnso-newgtld> -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mail to:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:to%3Agnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@> icann.org<http://icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld<mailto:gnso-newgtld> -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mail to:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:to%3Agnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander<mailto:alexander> @schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert<mailto:alexander@schubert> .berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berli<mailto:alexander@schubert.berli> n><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailt o:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexand<mailto:alexand> er@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schu<mailto:alexander@schu> bert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berl<mailto:alexander@schubert.berl> in<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailt o:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexand<mailto:alexand> er@schubert.berlin>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso<mailto:gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo> unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o> rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:to%3Adave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:ilto%3Adave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake>. net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecak<mailto:dave@davecak> e.net<http://e.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecak<mailto:dave@davecak> e.net<http://e.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@dave<mailto:dave@dave> cake.net<http://cake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@dav<mailto:dave@dav> ecake.net<http://ecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:to%3Adave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:ilto%3Adave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.n<mailto:dave@davecake.n> et><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake> .net<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake> .net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davec<mailto:dave@davec> ake.net<http://ake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@dave<mailto:dave@dave> cake.net<http://cake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or> g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.will<mailto:liz.will> iams@auda.org.au<mailto:iams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.o<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o> rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:lto%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz<mailto:liz>. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@au<mailto:liz.williams@au> da.org.au<http://da.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><; mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz<mailto:liz>. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@<mailto:liz.williams@> auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:l<mailto:l> iz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:iz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willi<mailto:liz.willi> ams@auda.org.au<mailto:ams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or> g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:to%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz.w<mailto:liz.w> illiams@auda.org.au<mailto:illiams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@aud<mailto:liz.williams@aud> a.org.au<http://a.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><m ailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:ailto%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.w<mailto:liz.w> illiams@auda.org.au<mailto:illiams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@a<mailto:liz.williams@a> uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:li<mailto:li> z.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:z.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au/<http://uda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.aud a.org.au/<http://a.org.au/>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear all, to complete the data gathered by Jorge, I copied below some parts of the decisions recently made by both the court and the appeal court in France regarding "France.com". Because the decisions were made with respect to the second level of a gTLD, you can easily infer that, a fortiori, the reasonning behind the decisions would also apply to the top level. The courts considered, inter alia, that geographic terms are part of a country's identity and that therefore sovereign rights apply to those terms; that delegating such terms to private companies in the DNS could constitute an illegal monopoly with respect to public interest. "Considérant que l’action en revendication de l’Etat français est fondée à titre principal sur les dispositions de l’article L 712-6 du code de la propriété intellectuelle ; que l’intimé se prévaut de droits sur la dénomination « France » et indique avoir vocation à être titulaire des marques litigieuses ; qu’il fait valoir en substance que ces marques sont trompeuses ou se heurtent à l’ordre public, qu’elles constituent une fraude aux intérêts de l’Etat à la protection d’une dénomination sur lequel s’exerce sa souveraineté et qui fonde son identité et qu’elles sont de nature à conférer au tour opérateur américain un monopole illégitime au regard de l’intérêt public général ; Considérant que contrairement à ce que soutient l’appelante, l’appellation « France » constitue pour l’Etat français un élément d’identité assimilable au nom patronymique d’une personne physique ; que ce terme désigne le territoire national dans son identité économique, géographique, historique, politique et culturelle, laquelle a notamment vocation à promouvoir l’ensemble des produits et services visés aux dépôts des marques considérées ; que le suffixe .com correspondant à une extension internet de nom de domaine n’est pas de nature à modifier la perception du signe ; Considérant que l’argument de l’appelante selon lequel l’Etat français, qui dispose d’autres adresses internet, « n’a pas besoin » du nom de domaine france.com est inopérant ; Considérant que pour des motifs identiques à ceux déjà exposés, ce nom de domaine permettant d’accéder à un site internet dédié au tourisme en France, porte atteinte à l’appellation « France » qui constitue pour l’Etat français un élément de son identité ;" GDS ________________________________________ De : Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] de la part de Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch [Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch] Envoyé : jeudi 10 mai 2018 09:01 À : Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch; mcgradygnso@gmail.com; paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com Cc : gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Objet : [***] Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Apart from the French case mentioned by Ghislain, you may find this German ruling interesting from 1999, which has inspired other cases (also in Switzerland): http://www.bettinger.de/en/infothek/domainrecht-a-z/domainrecht-urteile-und-... <http://www.bettinger.de/en/infothek/domainrecht-a-z/domainrecht-urteile-und-beschluesse/badwildbad-com/>(in German) Another interesting, Swiss, case is based on Art 29 ZGB (in French): https://www.bger.ch/ext/eurospider/live/fr/php/clir/http/index.php?lang=fr&t... As said, all this just reflects that city governments have an interest on their denomination, which at least in some countries are backed by the kind of rights existing in France, Germany or small Switzerland... In other countries these interests may have a different legal form, be based on public policy or in limits (as also exist in Switzerland) against monopolizing business names or trademarks composed solely by such geographic names (eg to register „lucerne“ instead of „lucerne foods“)... What is key is to get such public authorities at the table before the application runs too far, the applicant invests much money, because if the public authority is left aside it may come in later and there may be a protracted, costly conflict that benefits no one. The letter of non-objection avoids such unfortunate situations and ensures that the public authorities are OK with the application and gives a much better level of certainty to the applicant. In cultures, like apparently some anglosaxon countries (where up to now as far as I see almost all critics to the non-objection framework of the 2012 AGB are coming from), if public authorities have no policy nor legal interests in their name the process of obtaining non-objection letters should be very swift, as public authorities are bound by the rule of law and would naturally not have anything to object prima facie... And that is one perfectly possible approach under the non-objetion system. At the same time that system allows that other policy/legal cultures that have more affirmative interests on the names of geographic entities are also well served, because, as said, the relevant public authorities are made aware in a timely fashion of the application and are brought to a table. The result may also be laisser faire, or it may mean participating in governance or setting some shared rules. I hope this might help for our common understanding and remind us that ICANN sets policies for the global DNS, with solutions that best fit all interested parties worldwide. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Datum: 10. Mai 2018 um 07:41:52 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, mcgradygnso@gmail.com <mcgradygnso@gmail.com>, paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I forgot to refer to the Email from Ghislain de Salins who makes some very pertinent points and also references to some recent French case-law. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Datum: 10. Mai 2018 um 07:36:05 MESZ An: mcgradygnso@gmail.com <mcgradygnso@gmail.com>, paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Paul Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows. Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows. These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities. And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws. Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right. But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided... Best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Jorge, Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article: "Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction." Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech. Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks! Best, Paul On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect? On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> wrote: Jorge, Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)? Thanks, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com>><http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><http://kom. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb> augh.com<http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail>. com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gr<mailto:gr> egshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:egshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@<mailto:gregshatanipc@> gmail.com<http://gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><; mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmai<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmai> l.com<http://l.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto :mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><m ailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ailto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.ne<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.ne> t<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@c<mailto:mmoll@c> a.inter.net<http://a.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net>>>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso<mailto:gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.co m<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo> unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o> rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w> t5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:t5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann> .org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w> t5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:t5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailt o:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:o%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n> et<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.in<mailto:mmoll@ca.in> ter.net<http://ter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@<mailto:mmoll@> ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmo<mailto:mmo> ll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailt o:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:o%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n> et<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.in<mailto:mmoll@ca.in> ter.net<http://ter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@<mailto:mmoll@> ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmo<mailto:mmo> ll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i> cann.org<http://cann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld<mailto:gnso-newgtld> -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mail to:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:to%3Agnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@> icann.org<http://icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld<mailto:gnso-newgtld> -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mail to:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:to%3Agnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander<mailto:alexander> @schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert<mailto:alexander@schubert> .berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berli<mailto:alexander@schubert.berli> n><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailt o:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexand<mailto:alexand> er@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schu<mailto:alexander@schu> bert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berl<mailto:alexander@schubert.berl> in<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailt o:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexand<mailto:alexand> er@schubert.berlin>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso<mailto:gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo> unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o> rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:to%3Adave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:ilto%3Adave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake>. net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecak<mailto:dave@davecak> e.net<http://e.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecak<mailto:dave@davecak> e.net<http://e.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@dave<mailto:dave@dave> cake.net<http://cake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@dav<mailto:dave@dav> ecake.net<http://ecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:to%3Adave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:ilto%3Adave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.n<mailto:dave@davecake.n> et><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake> .net<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake> .net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davec<mailto:dave@davec> ake.net<http://ake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@dave<mailto:dave@dave> cake.net<http://cake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or> g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.will<mailto:liz.will> iams@auda.org.au<mailto:iams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.o<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o> rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:lto%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz<mailto:liz>. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@au<mailto:liz.williams@au> da.org.au<http://da.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><; mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz<mailto:liz>. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@<mailto:liz.williams@> auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:l<mailto:l> iz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:iz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willi<mailto:liz.willi> ams@auda.org.au<mailto:ams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or> g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:to%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz.w<mailto:liz.w> illiams@auda.org.au<mailto:illiams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@aud<mailto:liz.williams@aud> a.org.au<http://a.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><m ailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:ailto%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.w<mailto:liz.w> illiams@auda.org.au<mailto:illiams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@a<mailto:liz.williams@a> uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:li<mailto:li> z.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:z.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au/<http://uda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.aud a.org.au/<http://a.org.au/>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Ghislain, Thank you for the information. I think we have already covered country and territory names in WT5, to the extent that there is general acceptance to continue the AGB treatment, so France would, of course, be included in those terms. Kind regards, Martin Sent from my iPhone On 10 May 2018, at 08:39, DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr<mailto:ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr>> wrote: Dear all, to complete the data gathered by Jorge, I copied below some parts of the decisions recently made by both the court and the appeal court in France regarding "France.com<http://France.com>". Because the decisions were made with respect to the second level of a gTLD, you can easily infer that, a fortiori, the reasonning behind the decisions would also apply to the top level. The courts considered, inter alia, that geographic terms are part of a country's identity and that therefore sovereign rights apply to those terms; that delegating such terms to private companies in the DNS could constitute an illegal monopoly with respect to public interest. "Considérant que l’action en revendication de l’Etat français est fondée à titre principal sur les dispositions de l’article L 712-6 du code de la propriété intellectuelle ; que l’intimé se prévaut de droits sur la dénomination « France » et indique avoir vocation à être titulaire des marques litigieuses ; qu’il fait valoir en substance que ces marques sont trompeuses ou se heurtent à l’ordre public, qu’elles constituent une fraude aux intérêts de l’Etat à la protection d’une dénomination sur lequel s’exerce sa souveraineté et qui fonde son identité et qu’elles sont de nature à conférer au tour opérateur américain un monopole illégitime au regard de l’intérêt public général ; Considérant que contrairement à ce que soutient l’appelante, l’appellation « France » constitue pour l’Etat français un élément d’identité assimilable au nom patronymique d’une personne physique ; que ce terme désigne le territoire national dans son identité économique, géographique, historique, politique et culturelle, laquelle a notamment vocation à promouvoir l’ensemble des produits et services visés aux dépôts des marques considérées ; que le suffixe .com correspondant à une extension internet de nom de domaine n’est pas de nature à modifier la perception du signe ; Considérant que l’argument de l’appelante selon lequel l’Etat français, qui dispose d’autres adresses internet, « n’a pas besoin » du nom de domaine france.com<http://france.com> est inopérant ; Considérant que pour des motifs identiques à ceux déjà exposés, ce nom de domaine permettant d’accéder à un site internet dédié au tourisme en France, porte atteinte à l’appellation « France » qui constitue pour l’Etat français un élément de son identité ;" GDS ________________________________________ De : Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] de la part de Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> [Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>] Envoyé : jeudi 10 mai 2018 09:01 À : Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>; mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com>; paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Cc : gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Objet : [***] Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Apart from the French case mentioned by Ghislain, you may find this German ruling interesting from 1999, which has inspired other cases (also in Switzerland): http://www.bettinger.de/en/infothek/domainrecht-a-z/domainrecht-urteile-und-... <http://www.bettinger.de/en/infothek/domainrecht-a-z/domainrecht-urteile-und-beschluesse/badwildbad-com/>(in German) Another interesting, Swiss, case is based on Art 29 ZGB (in French): https://www.bger.ch/ext/eurospider/live/fr/php/clir/http/index.php?lang=fr&t... As said, all this just reflects that city governments have an interest on their denomination, which at least in some countries are backed by the kind of rights existing in France, Germany or small Switzerland... In other countries these interests may have a different legal form, be based on public policy or in limits (as also exist in Switzerland) against monopolizing business names or trademarks composed solely by such geographic names (eg to register „lucerne“ instead of „lucerne foods“)... What is key is to get such public authorities at the table before the application runs too far, the applicant invests much money, because if the public authority is left aside it may come in later and there may be a protracted, costly conflict that benefits no one. The letter of non-objection avoids such unfortunate situations and ensures that the public authorities are OK with the application and gives a much better level of certainty to the applicant. In cultures, like apparently some anglosaxon countries (where up to now as far as I see almost all critics to the non-objection framework of the 2012 AGB are coming from), if public authorities have no policy nor legal interests in their name the process of obtaining non-objection letters should be very swift, as public authorities are bound by the rule of law and would naturally not have anything to object prima facie... And that is one perfectly possible approach under the non-objetion system. At the same time that system allows that other policy/legal cultures that have more affirmative interests on the names of geographic entities are also well served, because, as said, the relevant public authorities are made aware in a timely fashion of the application and are brought to a table. The result may also be laisser faire, or it may mean participating in governance or setting some shared rules. I hope this might help for our common understanding and remind us that ICANN sets policies for the global DNS, with solutions that best fit all interested parties worldwide. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Datum: 10. Mai 2018 um 07:41:52 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com> <mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com>>, paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I forgot to refer to the Email from Ghislain de Salins who makes some very pertinent points and also references to some recent French case-law. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Datum: 10. Mai 2018 um 07:36:05 MESZ An: mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com> <mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com>>, paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Paul Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows. Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows. These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities. And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws. Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right. But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided... Best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com>> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Jorge, Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article: "Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction." Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech. Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks! Best, Paul On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect? On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> wrote: Jorge, Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)? Thanks, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com>><http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><http://kom. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com><http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> il.com<http://il.com><http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<http://r.net><http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net<http://nter.net><http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net><http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch><http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb> augh.com<http://augh.com><http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch><http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> il.com<http://il.com><http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail>. com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gr<mailto:gr> egshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:egshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:egshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@<mailto:gregshatanipc@> gmail.com<http://gmail.com><http://gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><; mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmai<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmai> l.com<http://l.com><http://l.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<http://r.net><http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net<http://nter.net><http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto :mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><m ailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:ailto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.ne<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.ne> t<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><http://er.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@c<mailto:mmoll@c> a.inter.net<http://a.inter.net><http://a.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net>>>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso<mailto:gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.co m<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch><http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo> unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org><mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o> rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w> t5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:t5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:t5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann> .org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w> t5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:t5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:t5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org><http://ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org><http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net><http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailt o:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:o%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n> et<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.in<mailto:mmoll@ca.in> ter.net<http://ter.net><http://ter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@<mailto:mmoll@> ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmo<mailto:mmo> ll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ll@ca.inter.net><mailto:ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net><http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailt o:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:o%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n> et<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.in<mailto:mmoll@ca.in> ter.net<http://ter.net><http://ter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@<mailto:mmoll@> ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmo<mailto:mmo> ll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ll@ca.inter.net><mailto:ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org><http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i> cann.org<http://cann.org><http://cann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld<mailto:gnso-newgtld> -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mail to:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:to%3Agnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@> icann.org<http://icann.org><http://icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld<mailto:gnso-newgtld> -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mail to:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:to%3Agnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org><mailto:ounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org><mailto:ounces@icann.org>>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander<mailto:alexander> @schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert<mailto:alexander@schubert> .berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berli<mailto:alexander@schubert.berli> n><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailt o:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexand<mailto:alexand> er@schubert.berlin<mailto:er@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schu<mailto:alexander@schu> bert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berl<mailto:alexander@schubert.berl> in<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailt o:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexand<mailto:alexand> er@schubert.berlin<mailto:er@schubert.berlin>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso<mailto:gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo> unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org><mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o> rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:to%3Adave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:ilto%3Adave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake>. net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecak<mailto:dave@davecak> e.net<http://e.net><http://e.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecak<mailto:dave@davecak> e.net<http://e.net><http://e.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@dave<mailto:dave@dave> cake.net<http://cake.net><http://cake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@dav<mailto:dave@dav> ecake.net<http://ecake.net><http://ecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:to%3Adave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:ilto%3Adave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.n<mailto:dave@davecake.n> et><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake> .net<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake> .net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davec<mailto:dave@davec> ake.net<http://ake.net><http://ake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@dave<mailto:dave@dave> cake.net<http://cake.net><http://cake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or> g.au<http://g.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.will<mailto:liz.will> iams@auda.org.au<mailto:iams@auda.org.au><mailto:iams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.o<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o> rg.au<http://rg.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:lto%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz<mailto:liz>. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:williams@auda.org.au><mailto:williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@au<mailto:liz.williams@au> da.org.au<http://da.org.au><http://da.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><; mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz<mailto:liz>. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:williams@auda.org.au><mailto:williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@<mailto:liz.williams@> auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au><http://auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:l<mailto:l> iz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:iz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:iz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willi<mailto:liz.willi> ams@auda.org.au<mailto:ams@auda.org.au><mailto:ams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or> g.au<http://g.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:to%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz.w<mailto:liz.w> illiams@auda.org.au<mailto:illiams@auda.org.au><mailto:illiams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@aud<mailto:liz.williams@aud> a.org.au<http://a.org.au><http://a.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><m ailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:ailto%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.w<mailto:liz.w> illiams@auda.org.au<mailto:illiams@auda.org.au><mailto:illiams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@a<mailto:liz.williams@a> uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:li<mailto:li> z.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:z.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:z.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au>/<http://uda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.aud a.org.au<http://a.org.au>/<http://a.org.au/>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Thanks Martin, Yes the courts decisions target in this case a country name at the second level. But if you read the reasonnings carefully (which is why I copied them below), you'll see that they are not limited to country names but apply to geographic terms in general ("éléments d'identité", "dénomination sur laquelle s'exerce une souveraineté", etc.) and include a fortiori city names as well. Best, GDS De : Martin Sutton [martin@brandregistrygroup.org] Envoyé : jeudi 10 mai 2018 09:50 À : DE SALINS Ghislain Cc : Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch; mcgradygnso@gmail.com; paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Objet : [***] Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Ghislain, Thank you for the information. I think we have already covered country and territory names in WT5, to the extent that there is general acceptance to continue the AGB treatment, so France would, of course, be included in those terms. Kind regards, Martin Sent from my iPhone On 10 May 2018, at 08:39, DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr<mailto:ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr>> wrote: Dear all, to complete the data gathered by Jorge, I copied below some parts of the decisions recently made by both the court and the appeal court in France regarding "France.com<http://France.com>". Because the decisions were made with respect to the second level of a gTLD, you can easily infer that, a fortiori, the reasonning behind the decisions would also apply to the top level. The courts considered, inter alia, that geographic terms are part of a country's identity and that therefore sovereign rights apply to those terms; that delegating such terms to private companies in the DNS could constitute an illegal monopoly with respect to public interest. "Considérant que l’action en revendication de l’Etat français est fondée à titre principal sur les dispositions de l’article L 712-6 du code de la propriété intellectuelle ; que l’intimé se prévaut de droits sur la dénomination « France » et indique avoir vocation à être titulaire des marques litigieuses ; qu’il fait valoir en substance que ces marques sont trompeuses ou se heurtent à l’ordre public, qu’elles constituent une fraude aux intérêts de l’Etat à la protection d’une dénomination sur lequel s’exerce sa souveraineté et qui fonde son identité et qu’elles sont de nature à conférer au tour opérateur américain un monopole illégitime au regard de l’intérêt public général ; Considérant que contrairement à ce que soutient l’appelante, l’appellation « France » constitue pour l’Etat français un élément d’identité assimilable au nom patronymique d’une personne physique ; que ce terme désigne le territoire national dans son identité économique, géographique, historique, politique et culturelle, laquelle a notamment vocation à promouvoir l’ensemble des produits et services visés aux dépôts des marques considérées ; que le suffixe .com correspondant à une extension internet de nom de domaine n’est pas de nature à modifier la perception du signe ; Considérant que l’argument de l’appelante selon lequel l’Etat français, qui dispose d’autres adresses internet, « n’a pas besoin » du nom de domaine france.com<http://france.com> est inopérant ; Considérant que pour des motifs identiques à ceux déjà exposés, ce nom de domaine permettant d’accéder à un site internet dédié au tourisme en France, porte atteinte à l’appellation « France » qui constitue pour l’Etat français un élément de son identité ;" GDS ________________________________________ De : Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] de la part de Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> [Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>] Envoyé : jeudi 10 mai 2018 09:01 À : Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>; mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com>; paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Cc : gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Objet : [***] Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Apart from the French case mentioned by Ghislain, you may find this German ruling interesting from 1999, which has inspired other cases (also in Switzerland): http://www.bettinger.de/en/infothek/domainrecht-a-z/domainrecht-urteile-und-... <http://www.bettinger.de/en/infothek/domainrecht-a-z/domainrecht-urteile-und-beschluesse/badwildbad-com/>(in German) Another interesting, Swiss, case is based on Art 29 ZGB (in French): https://www.bger.ch/ext/eurospider/live/fr/php/clir/http/index.php?lang=fr&t... As said, all this just reflects that city governments have an interest on their denomination, which at least in some countries are backed by the kind of rights existing in France, Germany or small Switzerland... In other countries these interests may have a different legal form, be based on public policy or in limits (as also exist in Switzerland) against monopolizing business names or trademarks composed solely by such geographic names (eg to register „lucerne“ instead of „lucerne foods“)... What is key is to get such public authorities at the table before the application runs too far, the applicant invests much money, because if the public authority is left aside it may come in later and there may be a protracted, costly conflict that benefits no one. The letter of non-objection avoids such unfortunate situations and ensures that the public authorities are OK with the application and gives a much better level of certainty to the applicant. In cultures, like apparently some anglosaxon countries (where up to now as far as I see almost all critics to the non-objection framework of the 2012 AGB are coming from), if public authorities have no policy nor legal interests in their name the process of obtaining non-objection letters should be very swift, as public authorities are bound by the rule of law and would naturally not have anything to object prima facie... And that is one perfectly possible approach under the non-objetion system. At the same time that system allows that other policy/legal cultures that have more affirmative interests on the names of geographic entities are also well served, because, as said, the relevant public authorities are made aware in a timely fashion of the application and are brought to a table. The result may also be laisser faire, or it may mean participating in governance or setting some shared rules. I hope this might help for our common understanding and remind us that ICANN sets policies for the global DNS, with solutions that best fit all interested parties worldwide. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Datum: 10. Mai 2018 um 07:41:52 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com> <mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com>>, paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I forgot to refer to the Email from Ghislain de Salins who makes some very pertinent points and also references to some recent French case-law. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Datum: 10. Mai 2018 um 07:36:05 MESZ An: mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com> <mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com>>, paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Paul Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows. Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows. These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities. And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws. Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right. But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided... Best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com>> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Jorge, Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article: "Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction." Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech. Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks! Best, Paul On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>, mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect? On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> wrote: Jorge, Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)? Thanks, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge> .mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Liz Williams <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have http://lucernefoods.com> because http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <http://kom. http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> http://www.a http://uda.org.au>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><UrlBlockedError.aspx> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>, mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><UrlBlockedError.aspx> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike> @rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailt o:mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> mailto:mmoll@ca.i> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>, mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><UrlBlockedError.aspx> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mail to:mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><ma ilto:mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail>. com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gr<mailto:gr> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@<mailto:gregshatanipc@> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmai<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmai> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>>; mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> mailto:mmoll@ca.i> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto :mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><m ailto:mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.ne> t<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@c<mailto:mmoll@c> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> mailto:l@ca.inter.net>>>>>>; mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso<mailto:gnso> -mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <http://city.co m<http://city.com<http://city.com/>><UrlBlockedError.aspx>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><UrlBlockedError.aspx> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o> rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann> .org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto :mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailt o:mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n> et<mailto:mmoll@ca.in> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@<mailto:mmoll@> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmo<mailto:mmo> mailto:ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailt o:mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n> et<mailto:mmoll@ca.in> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@<mailto:mmoll@> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmo<mailto:mmo> mailto:ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto :mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld<mailto:gnso-newgtld> -mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mail to:mailto:to%3Agnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld<mailto:gnso-newgtld> -mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mail to:mailto:to%3Agnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> mailto:ounces@icann.org>>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander<mailto:alexander> @schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert<mailto:alexander@schubert> .berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berli> n><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailt o:mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexand<mailto:alexand> mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schu<mailto:alexander@schu> bert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berl> in<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailt o:mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexand<mailto:alexand> er@schubert.berlin<mailto:er@schubert.berlin>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso<mailto:gnso> -mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o> rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto :mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mail to:mailto:dave@davecake.net><ma ilto:mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake>. net><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecak<mailto:dave@davecak> mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecak<mailto:dave@davecak> mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@dave<mailto:dave@dave> mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@dav<mailto:dave@dav> mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>><mailto :mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto :mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mail to:mailto:dave@davecake.net><ma ilto:mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.n> et><mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake> .net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake> .net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davec<mailto:dave@davec> mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@dave<mailto:dave@dave> mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> mailto:liz.williams@auda.or> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto :mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.will<mailto:liz.will> mailto:liz.williams@auda.o> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mai lto:mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz<mailto:liz>. mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@au<mailto:liz.williams@au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>< mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz<mailto:liz>. mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@<mailto:liz.williams@> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:l<mailto:l> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willi<mailto:liz.willi> mailto:liz.williams@auda.or> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mail to:mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz.w<mailto:liz.w> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@aud<mailto:liz.williams@aud> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><m ailto:mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.w<mailto:liz.w> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@a<mailto:liz.williams@a> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:li<mailto:li> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>> http://www.a http://www.aud http://a.org.au/>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Martin, you wrote: “I think we have already covered country and territory names in WT5, to the extent that there is general acceptance to continue the AGB treatment….” And this is a very good indicator as to why the inhabitants of cities with a sizeable population need SOME “protection” as well. Of the 233 countries and territories listed in Wikipedia ONE THIRD (80) have less than 1 Million inhabitants. And we seem to agree that they need EXTREME “protection” – a letter of non-objection is seemingly not even enough. 32 of these territories have even less than 100,000 inhabitants. In that respect: the Internet usage becomes more and more LOCAL. People are looking up stuff IN THEIR CITY – not predominantly in another country or nationally. People look for stores, the cinema schedule, etc. Depending on the source it seems that already over two thirds of all searches in Google are LOCAL! In large cities that will logically be much higher. A city is a much better Internet identifier than a country. When we over-protect country names that way – how can we claim to be halfway congruent if we do need at least provide SOME protection to cities as well? At least sizeable cities. With 15% of all territories having less than 100,000 inhabitants I assume the BARE MINIUM would be to protect all cities with at least 100,000 people. A cut-off size at between 10,000 and 50,000 would make much more sense as in many countries there are few cities making the 100,000 cut-off. In Latvia there are at least 4 cities worth a city gTLD just in the next round – but only ONE (the capital – which is anyway protected) makes the 100,000 cut-off! In Switzerland there are a whole bunch of cities that might want to go for a city gTLD (e.g. to promote tourism, eGovernment, etc) – but just 5 (outside the capital) would be protected. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Martin Sutton Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 10:50 AM To: DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Ghislain, Thank you for the information. I think we have already covered country and territory names in WT5, to the extent that there is general acceptance to continue the AGB treatment, so France would, of course, be included in those terms. Kind regards, Martin Sent from my iPhone On 10 May 2018, at 08:39, DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr <mailto:ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr> > wrote: _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Alexander, I think you are making too many assumptions in your email about the motivation of why the group may accept continuing AGB treatment. You extrapolate the fact that if we decide to protect countries in a certain way, that we should protect any geographic area with a population equal to the size of the smallest country. I think that is too large of a leap at this point. Acceptance of AGB terms for countries may have nothing to do with population. That may very well be a possible outcome, but we are not there now. Jeffrey J. Neuman Senior Vice President |Valideus USA | Com Laude USA 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600 Mclean, VA 22102, United States E: jeff.neuman@valideus.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com> or jeff.neuman@comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com> T: +1.703.635.7514 M: +1.202.549.5079 @Jintlaw From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Alexander Schubert Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 9:13 AM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Martin, you wrote: “I think we have already covered country and territory names in WT5, to the extent that there is general acceptance to continue the AGB treatment….” And this is a very good indicator as to why the inhabitants of cities with a sizeable population need SOME “protection” as well. Of the 233 countries and territories listed in Wikipedia ONE THIRD (80) have less than 1 Million inhabitants. And we seem to agree that they need EXTREME “protection” – a letter of non-objection is seemingly not even enough. 32 of these territories have even less than 100,000 inhabitants. In that respect: the Internet usage becomes more and more LOCAL. People are looking up stuff IN THEIR CITY – not predominantly in another country or nationally. People look for stores, the cinema schedule, etc. Depending on the source it seems that already over two thirds of all searches in Google are LOCAL! In large cities that will logically be much higher. A city is a much better Internet identifier than a country. When we over-protect country names that way – how can we claim to be halfway congruent if we do need at least provide SOME protection to cities as well? At least sizeable cities. With 15% of all territories having less than 100,000 inhabitants I assume the BARE MINIUM would be to protect all cities with at least 100,000 people. A cut-off size at between 10,000 and 50,000 would make much more sense as in many countries there are few cities making the 100,000 cut-off. In Latvia there are at least 4 cities worth a city gTLD just in the next round – but only ONE (the capital – which is anyway protected) makes the 100,000 cut-off! In Switzerland there are a whole bunch of cities that might want to go for a city gTLD (e.g. to promote tourism, eGovernment, etc) – but just 5 (outside the capital) would be protected. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Martin Sutton Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 10:50 AM To: DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr<mailto:ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Ghislain, Thank you for the information. I think we have already covered country and territory names in WT5, to the extent that there is general acceptance to continue the AGB treatment, so France would, of course, be included in those terms. Kind regards, Martin Sent from my iPhone On 10 May 2018, at 08:39, DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr<mailto:ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr>> wrote: _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Jeff, Martin: The objective should be to extend analogous appropriate protection to all geographical names within agreed limits of granularity and subsidiarity. Insofar as there has been "general acceptance to continue the AGB treatment" that has so far been limited to the pre-existing AGB categories. It certainly does not imply "… and nothing more". Regards CW
El 10 de mayo de 2018 a las 16:30 Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman@comlaude.com> escribió:
Alexander,
I think you are making too many assumptions in your email about the motivation of why the group may accept continuing AGB treatment. You extrapolate the fact that if we decide to protect countries in a certain way, that we should protect any geographic area with a population equal to the size of the smallest country. I think that is too large of a leap at this point. Acceptance of AGB terms for countries may have nothing to do with population. That may very well be a possible outcome, but we are not there now.
Jeffrey J. Neuman
Senior Vice President |Valideus USA | Com Laude USA
1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600
Mclean, VA 22102, United States
E: jeff.neuman@valideus.com mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com or jeff.neuman@comlaude.com mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com
T: +1.703.635.7514
M: +1.202.549.5079
@Jintlaw
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Alexander Schubert Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 9:13 AM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Martin,
you wrote: “I think we have already covered country and territory names in WT5, to the extent that there is general acceptance to continue the AGB treatment….”
And this is a very good indicator as to why the inhabitants of cities with a sizeable population need SOME “protection” as well. Of the 233 countries and territories listed in Wikipedia ONE THIRD (80) have less than 1 Million inhabitants. And we seem to agree that they need EXTREME “protection” – a letter of non-objection is seemingly not even enough. 32 of these territories have even less than 100,000 inhabitants.
In that respect: the Internet usage becomes more and more LOCAL. People are looking up stuff IN THEIR CITY – not predominantly in another country or nationally. People look for stores, the cinema schedule, etc. Depending on the source it seems that already over two thirds of all searches in Google are LOCAL! In large cities that will logically be much higher. A city is a much better Internet identifier than a country. When we over-protect country names that way – how can we claim to be halfway congruent if we do need at least provide SOME protection to cities as well? At least sizeable cities.
With 15% of all territories having less than 100,000 inhabitants I assume the BARE MINIUM would be to protect all cities with at least 100,000 people. A cut-off size at between 10,000 and 50,000 would make much more sense as in many countries there are few cities making the 100,000 cut-off. In Latvia there are at least 4 cities worth a city gTLD just in the next round – but only ONE (the capital – which is anyway protected) makes the 100,000 cut-off! In Switzerland there are a whole bunch of cities that might want to go for a city gTLD (e.g. to promote tourism, eGovernment, etc) – but just 5 (outside the capital) would be protected.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Martin Sutton Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 10:50 AM To: DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr mailto:ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr > Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Ghislain,
Thank you for the information. I think we have already covered country and territory names in WT5, to the extent that there is general acceptance to continue the AGB treatment, so France would, of course, be included in those terms.
Kind regards,
Martin
Sent from my iPhone
On 10 May 2018, at 08:39, DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr mailto:ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr > wrote:
> >
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
There seems to a massive conflation by some of the term “local law” with the term “international law”. Local law applies locally. If local law applied internationally, it would be called "international law". But it isn’t. It is called local law, because it only applies locally, not internationally. I’m disappointed by the attempts by some govts to pretend like these two entirely different concepts have the same meaning and the same effect globally. It is either ignorance or an attempt to mislead. Either way, it is troubling. Best, Robin
On May 9, 2018, at 10:35 PM, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch wrote:
Dear Paul
Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows.
Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows.
These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities.
And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws.
Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right.
But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided...
Best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Jorge,
Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article:
"Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction."
Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech.
Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks!
Best, Paul
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect?
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> wrote: Jorge,
Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)?
Thanks,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><http://kom. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb> augh.com<http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail>. com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gr<mailto:gr> egshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:egshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@<mailto:gregshatanipc@> gmail.com<http://gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><; mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmai<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmai> l.com<http://l.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto :mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><m ailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ailto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.ne<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.ne> t<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@c<mailto:mmoll@c> a.inter.net<http://a.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net>>>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso<mailto:gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com><http://city.com/><http://city.co m<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo> unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o> rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w> t5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:t5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann> .org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w> t5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:t5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailt o:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:o%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n> et<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.in<mailto:mmoll@ca.in> ter.net<http://ter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@<mailto:mmoll@> ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmo<mailto:mmo> ll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailt o:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:o%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.n> et<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.in<mailto:mmoll@ca.in> ter.net<http://ter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@<mailto:mmoll@> ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmo<mailto:mmo> ll@ca.inter.net<mailto:ll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@ic> ann.org<http://ann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg> -wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@i> cann.org<http://cann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld<mailto:gnso-newgtld> -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mail to:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:to%3Agnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@> icann.org<http://icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld<mailto:gnso-newgtld> -wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mail to:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:to%3Agnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander<mailto:alexander> @schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert<mailto:alexander@schubert> .berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berli<mailto:alexander@schubert.berli> n><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailt o:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexand<mailto:alexand> er@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>><mailto:alexander@schu<mailto:alexander@schu> bert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berl<mailto:alexander@schubert.berl> in<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailt o:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexand<mailto:alexand> er@schubert.berlin>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso<mailto:gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bo> unces@icann.org<mailto:unces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.or> g><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-b> ounces@icann.org<mailto:ounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-<mailto:gnso-> newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.o> rg<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:to%3Adave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:ilto%3Adave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake>. net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecak<mailto:dave@davecak> e.net<http://e.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecak<mailto:dave@davecak> e.net<http://e.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@dave<mailto:dave@dave> cake.net<http://cake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@dav<mailto:dave@dav> ecake.net<http://ecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>><mailto :gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto :dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mail to:dave@davecake.net<mailto:to%3Adave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><ma ilto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:ilto%3Adave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>< mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.n<mailto:dave@davecake.n> et><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake> .net<mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake<mailto:dave@davecake> .net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davec<mailto:dave@davec> ake.net<http://ake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@dave<mailto:dave@dave> cake.net<http://cake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or> g.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto :liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.will<mailto:liz.will> iams@auda.org.au<mailto:iams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.o<mailto:liz.williams@auda.o> rg.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mai lto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:lto%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz<mailto:liz>. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@au<mailto:liz.williams@au> da.org.au<http://da.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><; mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz<mailto:liz>. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@<mailto:liz.williams@> auda.org.au<http://auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:l<mailto:l> iz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:iz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.willi<mailto:liz.willi> ams@auda.org.au<mailto:ams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.or<mailto:liz.williams@auda.or> g.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mail to:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:to%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz.w<mailto:liz.w> illiams@auda.org.au<mailto:illiams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@aud<mailto:liz.williams@aud> a.org.au<http://a.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><m ailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:ailto%3Aliz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.w<mailto:liz.w> illiams@auda.org.au<mailto:illiams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@a<mailto:liz.williams@a> uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:li<mailto:li> z.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:z.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au/<http://uda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.aud a.org.au/<http://a.org.au/>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gns<mailto:Gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso<mailto:Gnso> -newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gn<mailto:Gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:G<mailto:G> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
I agree 100% with Robin. ICANN is not bound to follow every local law in the world. All law is not “applicable” to ICANN. Echoing Robin, I’m not sure if this is willful or ignorant (or willfully ignorant).... The subtext here is that local law that supports a certain position (or fulfills a certain wish) is “applicable,” but all the rest isn’t. That is not an intellectually sustainable position. Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
There seems to a massive conflation by some of the term “local law” with the term “international law”. Local law applies locally. If local law applied internationally, it would be called "international law". But it isn’t. It is called local law, because it only applies locally, not internationally. I’m disappointed by the attempts by some govts to pretend like these two entirely different concepts have the same meaning and the same effect globally. It is either ignorance or an attempt to mislead. Either way, it is troubling.
Best, Robin
On May 9, 2018, at 10:35 PM, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch wrote:
Dear Paul
Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows.
Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows.
These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities.
And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws.
Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right.
But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided...
Best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, Greg Shatan ( gregshatanipc@gmail.com) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Jorge,
Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article:
"Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction."
Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech.
Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks!
Best, Paul
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig < paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com
Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect?
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> wrote: Jorge,
Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)?
Thanks,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge<mailto:Jorge> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs <mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><; http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><; http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><; http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs <mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>< http://kom. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point
(Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.william<mailto:liz.william> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><; http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau <mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau <mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto: gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh <mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau <mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike<mailto:mike> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto: gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh <mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan <mailto:gregshatan> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte <mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i <mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int <mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau <mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto: mike@rodenb> augh.com<http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:m<mailto:m> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto: mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<<
Thanks, Robin, all, for your comments. No question that “local law” is by definition not “international law”. As many in this WT know, Article 38 of the Statue of the International Court of Justice (which is in itself an international treaty) is often referenced as an authoritative codification of International Law sources. Art 38 requires the ICJ to apply: (a) international conventions [treaties] whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by states; (b) international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law by states; (c) the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations; (d) and in some cases judicial decisions and writings/teachings of the most highly qualified publicists (professors, experts, etc) as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law. As such, the only theory where I see a local rule being also an internationally binding norm, is if it is also a general principle of law (for example, “he who causes harm on another is liable for that harm” -the basis of civil law extra-contractual responsibility and Anglo-American torts law) whether clear and convincing evidence is provided that certain local norm or practice is also a general and consistent practice of states viewed as legally binding (opinio juris) by those states, and thus binding customary law. I think there are groups of states with similar views on GeoNames, and other states and groupings of states with divergent positions. I think it would be difficult -though not impossible- to argue for general principles of law or customary law there. I do think there are binding multilateral treaties that are relevant to our discussion, for example the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Some have pointed to its freedom of speech and related linguistic rights articles. A case could also be made that its “self-determination of peoples” provisions could also be relevant. But ICANN by its bylaws must not only carry out its activities “in conformity with relevant principles of international law and international conventions” but also in conformity with “applicable local law, through open and transparent processes that enable competition and open entry in Internet-related markets.” (Section 1.2.a) So I think the extent of this “applicable local law” mandate is perhaps the one colleagues like Jorge and others cite. To those better versed than I in ICANN bylaw lore and history, a question: is this “applicable local law” language merely a reference to California Corporations Law or is it a broader, more inclusive statement encompassing local laws of countries and territories where ICANN has some presence, contact or impact through its contracts? Comments? Javier Rúa-Jovet +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 11, 2018, at 1:57 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
I agree 100% with Robin.
ICANN is not bound to follow every local law in the world. All law is not “applicable” to ICANN. Echoing Robin, I’m not sure if this is willful or ignorant (or willfully ignorant).... The subtext here is that local law that supports a certain position (or fulfills a certain wish) is “applicable,” but all the rest isn’t. That is not an intellectually sustainable position.
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote: There seems to a massive conflation by some of the term “local law” with the term “international law”. Local law applies locally. If local law applied internationally, it would be called "international law". But it isn’t. It is called local law, because it only applies locally, not internationally. I’m disappointed by the attempts by some govts to pretend like these two entirely different concepts have the same meaning and the same effect globally. It is either ignorance or an attempt to mislead. Either way, it is troubling.
Best, Robin
On May 9, 2018, at 10:35 PM, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch wrote:
Dear Paul
Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows.
Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows.
These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities.
And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws.
Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right.
But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided...
Best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Jorge,
Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article:
"Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction."
Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech.
Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks!
Best, Paul
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect?
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> wrote: Jorge,
Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)?
Thanks,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><http://kom. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb> augh.com<http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<<
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Javier, i think we need to read Section 1.2 in its entirety, so that it is clear that the clause "through open and transparent processes..." is not appended to "applicable local law." (I'm sure this was not your intention, but in your email that's now it looks.) Rather, this final clause is an independent statement that ICANN must operate "through open and transparent processes that enable competition and open entry in Internet-related markets.": In performing its Mission, ICANN must operate in a manner consistent with these Bylaws for the benefit of the Internet community as a whole, carrying out its activities in conformity with relevant principles of international law and international conventions and applicable local law, through open and transparent processes that enable competition and open entry in Internet-related markets. Let's think about that clause and particularly the instruction to "enable competition and open entry." Any system that holds top level domains back from the market by imposing an approval right on one potential claimant to that domain is not a system that enables "open entry" or "competition." It takes things (TLDs) that while unique, are not little monopolies, and turns them into monopolistic tools, enabling one possible claimant to extract monopoly rents from actual applicants by virtue of its privileged position. This may even discourage some potential applicants from being actual applicants -- also a sign that this is antithetical to "open entry." (Recently, one participant cited with approval the withdrawal of the .patagonia application by Patagonia Inc., because they could get their money back after a huge hurdles was thrown up before them. I cite this as a deeply problematic episode that flies in the face of "enabling competition and open entry." Patagonia was driven away because they couldn't spend massive sums to advocate for their right to apply for and be delegated .patagonia.) ICANN policy has consistently disfavored reservations (other than for technical reasons), blocking rights and other systems that prevent a TLD (or second level domain) from entering the market. Any list-based exclusionary right has undergone strict scrutiny and has been applied narrowly, to a few particularly deserving parties. Systems that allow multiple parties to vie for a TLD (contention sets), or that provide only a time-limited right which, when exercised, result in a registration (e.g., sunrise) are more in line with the idea of enabling competition and open entry. Sunrise is followed by "General Availability," a concept that is well-aligned with competition and open entry. I see no General Availability in the "geo-centric" proposals, at least not yet. Rather, I see perpetual gatekeeping. The instruction to enable competition and open entry is but one principle from which the preference for registration and delegation over reservation and elimination in ICANN policy springs. Let's keep that in mind. Greg On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 2:38 PM, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks, Robin, all, for your comments.
No question that “local law” is by definition not “international law”.
As many in this WT know, Article 38 of the Statue of the International Court of Justice (which is in itself an international treaty) is often referenced as an authoritative codification of International Law sources.
Art 38 requires the ICJ to apply: (a) international conventions [treaties] whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by states; (b) international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law by states; (c) the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations; (d) and in some cases judicial decisions and writings/teachings of the most highly qualified publicists (professors, experts, etc) as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law.
As such, the only theory where I see a local rule being also an internationally binding norm, is if it is also a general principle of law (for example, “he who causes harm on another is liable for that harm” -the basis of civil law extra-contractual responsibility and Anglo-American torts law) whether clear and convincing evidence is provided that certain local norm or practice is also a general and consistent practice of states viewed as legally binding (opinio juris) by those states, and thus binding customary law.
I think there are groups of states with similar views on GeoNames, and other states and groupings of states with divergent positions. I think it would be difficult -though not impossible- to argue for general principles of law or customary law there.
I do think there are binding multilateral treaties that are relevant to our discussion, for example the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Some have pointed to its freedom of speech and related linguistic rights articles. A case could also be made that its “self-determination of peoples” provisions could also be relevant.
But ICANN by its bylaws must not only carry out its activities “in conformity with relevant principles of international law and international conventions” but also in conformity with “applicable local law, through open and transparent processes that enable competition and open entry in Internet-related markets.” (Section 1.2.a)
So I think the extent of this “applicable local law” mandate is perhaps the one colleagues like Jorge and others cite.
To those better versed than I in ICANN bylaw lore and history, a question: is this “applicable local law” language merely a reference to California Corporations Law or is it a broader, more inclusive statement encompassing local laws of countries and territories where ICANN has some presence, contact or impact through its contracts?
Comments?
Javier Rúa-Jovet
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 11, 2018, at 1:57 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
I agree 100% with Robin.
ICANN is not bound to follow every local law in the world. All law is not “applicable” to ICANN. Echoing Robin, I’m not sure if this is willful or ignorant (or willfully ignorant).... The subtext here is that local law that supports a certain position (or fulfills a certain wish) is “applicable,” but all the rest isn’t. That is not an intellectually sustainable position.
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
There seems to a massive conflation by some of the term “local law” with the term “international law”. Local law applies locally. If local law applied internationally, it would be called "international law". But it isn’t. It is called local law, because it only applies locally, not internationally. I’m disappointed by the attempts by some govts to pretend like these two entirely different concepts have the same meaning and the same effect globally. It is either ignorance or an attempt to mislead. Either way, it is troubling.
Best, Robin
On May 9, 2018, at 10:35 PM, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch wrote:
Dear Paul
Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows.
Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows.
These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities.
And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws.
Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right.
But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided...
Best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, Greg Shatan ( gregshatanipc@gmail.com) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Jorge,
Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article:
"Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction."
Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech.
Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks!
Best, Paul
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@ redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> < gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect?
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> wrote: Jorge,
Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)?
Thanks,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge<mailto:Jorge> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs< mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsha tanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz. willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http:// www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><; http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><; http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs< mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsha tanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<http://kom. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz. willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz. willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz. william<mailto:liz.william> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au
<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>< mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><; http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike @rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau <mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mik e@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike @rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau <mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mik e@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto: gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh< mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike @rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau <mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mik e@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike<mailto:mike> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com><mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto: gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh< mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gre gshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshat an<mailto:gregshatan> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte <mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i <mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int <mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge .Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau <mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike @rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com>>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenb <mailto:mike@rodenb> augh.com<http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto: mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mik e@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<<
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
As WT co-lead, I request more congenial engagement among colleagues. Thank you, Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 11, 2018, at 1:57 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
I agree 100% with Robin.
ICANN is not bound to follow every local law in the world. All law is not “applicable” to ICANN. Echoing Robin, I’m not sure if this is willful or ignorant (or willfully ignorant).... The subtext here is that local law that supports a certain position (or fulfills a certain wish) is “applicable,” but all the rest isn’t. That is not an intellectually sustainable position.
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote: There seems to a massive conflation by some of the term “local law” with the term “international law”. Local law applies locally. If local law applied internationally, it would be called "international law". But it isn’t. It is called local law, because it only applies locally, not internationally. I’m disappointed by the attempts by some govts to pretend like these two entirely different concepts have the same meaning and the same effect globally. It is either ignorance or an attempt to mislead. Either way, it is troubling.
Best, Robin
On May 9, 2018, at 10:35 PM, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch wrote:
Dear Paul
Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows.
Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows.
These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities.
And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws.
Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right.
But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided...
Best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Jorge,
Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article:
"Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction."
Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech.
Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks!
Best, Paul
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect?
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> wrote: Jorge,
Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)?
Thanks,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><http://kom. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma> il.com<http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte> r.net<http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i> nter.net<http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int> er.net<http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>. inter.net<http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad> min.ch<http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi> n.ch<http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>
>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau> gh.com<http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb> augh.com<http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<<
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Greg, Yes, you’re right to point that there are different categories of things and that we should not confuse them. There is local law and international law. There is ICANN and the UN. Now, those categories being different doesn’t mean they’re not related, or that one could not articulate them. Just as ICANN doesn’t live in autarky, local and international law nourish and cross reference each other. International law is the product of national governments agreeing on common principles, with results ranging from biding treaties to soft law like declarations, recommendations, advice, etc. You’ll see that the courts decisions referenced in this thread (local law) actually have direct and indirect references to international law. Reciprocally, international law is built on concepts derived from national law especially courts decisions that often go much more into details and real life issues. There is ongoing work in UNESCO and WIPO on cultural heritage / geo names and how to protect them. And a national court may very well use those general frameworks to apply them to the domain names system. Think about how in 2014 the European court of justice found in a 1995 directive on privacy the basis for the right to be delisted on search engines (and I can tell you the word “such engine” does not appear in this directive just as the “DNS” doesn’t in some other sources of law...). So it would be dangerous and, in my opinion, a stretch to completely outline local laws from the discussion. First because local laws, at least so far, have been complied with by ICANN (think GDPR). And second because what an applicant wants above all is legal certainty (again, think GDPR and how much trouble could have been avoided if we tried to incorporate the law in the policy first instead of doing the opposite). So what we don’t want is a policy that would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it challenged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks. Anyway, let’s try to be open and not think only with binary views and extreme postions. Best GDS ________________________________________ De : Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] de la part de Greg Shatan [gregshatanipc@gmail.com] Envoyé : vendredi 11 mai 2018 19:57 À : Robin Gross Cc : gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Objet : [***] Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I agree 100% with Robin. ICANN is not bound to follow every local law in the world. All law is not “applicable” to ICANN. Echoing Robin, I’m not sure if this is willful or ignorant (or willfully ignorant).... The subtext here is that local law that supports a certain position (or fulfills a certain wish) is “applicable,” but all the rest isn’t. That is not an intellectually sustainable position. Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> wrote: There seems to a massive conflation by some of the term “local law” with the term “international law”. Local law applies locally. If local law applied internationally, it would be called "international law". But it isn’t. It is called local law, because it only applies locally, not internationally. I’m disappointed by the attempts by some govts to pretend like these two entirely different concepts have the same meaning and the same effect globally. It is either ignorance or an attempt to mislead. Either way, it is troubling. Best, Robin
On May 9, 2018, at 10:35 PM, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Paul
Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows.
Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows.
These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities.
And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws.
Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right.
But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided...
Best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com>> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Jorge,
Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article:
"Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction."
Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech.
Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks!
Best, Paul
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect?
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>> wrote: Jorge,
Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)?
Thanks,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou>> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new>> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><http://kom. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william>> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org>> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike><mailto:mike<mailto:mike>> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma>> il.com<http://il.com><http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan>> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte>> r.net<http://r.net><http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i>> nter.net<http://nter.net><http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll>> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int>> er.net<http://er.net><http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>>. inter.net<http://inter.net><http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol>> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns><mailto:gns<mailto:gns>> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo>> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci>> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b>> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi>> n.ch<http://n.ch><http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>
wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb>> augh.com<http://augh.com><http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m><mailto:m<mailto:m>> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh>> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><<
Dear all Based on the experience from last round, the points raised By Chislain de Salins are worth noticing. A relevant question could be: If the requirement for a non-objection/support letter had not been implemented in the AGB 2012, would there have been more conflicts? Many cities are now in the root after having consultations with relevant governments. It is worth asking ourselves if there would have more problems, delays and court cases if things hadn’t been sorted out in advance. What Chislain writes below, that we don’t want a “policy that would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it challenged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks” – makes a lot of sense to me. I do not take stand as to how this should be solved, but I think it would be to the benefit of all stakeholders to avoid as many problems, court cases and delays as possible. This discussion, which as I have been following as a co-chair, has been intense and interesting and shows strongly different views. However, if we could pick the elements from both sides that will strengthen the policy for next round, we would all gain from that and at the same time strengthen us as an organization that shows how to work together. Kind regards, Annebeth From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr> Date: Saturday, 12 May 2018 at 02:42 To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> Cc: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [***] Re: Conference call: city names Dear Greg, Yes, you’re right to point that there are different categories of things and that we should not confuse them. There is local law and international law. There is ICANN and the UN. Now, those categories being different doesn’t mean they’re not related, or that one could not articulate them. Just as ICANN doesn’t live in autarky, local and international law nourish and cross reference each other. International law is the product of national governments agreeing on common principles, with results ranging from biding treaties to soft law like declarations, recommendations, advice, etc. You’ll see that the courts decisions referenced in this thread (local law) actually have direct and indirect references to international law. Reciprocally, international law is built on concepts derived from national law especially courts decisions that often go much more into details and real life issues. There is ongoing work in UNESCO and WIPO on cultural heritage / geo names and how to protect them. And a national court may very well use those general frameworks to apply them to the domain names system. Think about how in 2014 the European court of justice found in a 1995 directive on privacy the basis for the right to be delisted on search engines (and I can tell you the word “such engine” does not appear in this directive just as the “DNS” doesn’t in some other sources of law...). So it would be dangerous and, in my opinion, a stretch to completely outline local laws from the discussion. First because local laws, at least so far, have been complied with by ICANN (think GDPR). And second because what an applicant wants above all is legal certainty (again, think GDPR and how much trouble could have been avoided if we tried to incorporate the law in the policy first instead of doing the opposite). So what we don’t want is a policy that would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it challenged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks. Anyway, let’s try to be open and not think only with binary views and extreme postions. Best GDS ________________________________________ De : Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] de la part de Greg Shatan [gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Envoyé : vendredi 11 mai 2018 19:57 À : Robin Gross Cc : gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Objet : [***] Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I agree 100% with Robin. ICANN is not bound to follow every local law in the world. All law is not “applicable” to ICANN. Echoing Robin, I’m not sure if this is willful or ignorant (or willfully ignorant).... The subtext here is that local law that supports a certain position (or fulfills a certain wish) is “applicable,” but all the rest isn’t. That is not an intellectually sustainable position. Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org><mailto:robin@ipjustice.org><mailto:robin@ipjustice.org%3e>> wrote: There seems to a massive conflation by some of the term “local law” with the term “international law”. Local law applies locally. If local law applied internationally, it would be called "international law". But it isn’t. It is called local law, because it only applies locally, not internationally. I’m disappointed by the attempts by some govts to pretend like these two entirely different concepts have the same meaning and the same effect globally. It is either ignorance or an attempt to mislead. Either way, it is troubling. Best, Robin On May 9, 2018, at 10:35 PM, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote: Dear Paul Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows. Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows. These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities. And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws. Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right. But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided... Best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com><mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com><mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com%3e>> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3e>> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e>>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e>) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Jorge, Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article: "Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction." Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech. Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks! Best, Paul On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3e%3cmailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3cmailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3e%3e>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e>> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect? On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Jorge, Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)? Thanks, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3e%3e> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new>><mailto:nces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nces@icann.org%3cmailto:nces@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-new%3cmailto:gnso-new%3e%3cmailto:gnso-new%3cmailto:gnso-new%3e%3e> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e%3e> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3e> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3e> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c<http://www.lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucernefoods.c> om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/lucernefoods.com>> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucerne.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucerne.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucerne.com>> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3e> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><http://kom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3chttp://kom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>><http://admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/admin.ch%3e%3e>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3e> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3e> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.william%3cmailto:liz.william%3e%3cmailto:liz.william%3cmailto:liz.william%3e%3e> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org><mailto:s@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:s@auda.org.au%3cmailto:s@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3e>> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto>: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a<http://www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.a> uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/uda.org.au%3e>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3e> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3e> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmail> to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmai> lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>><http://om.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/om.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3e> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><http://min.ch%3e%3chttp:/min.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cma> ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike><mailto:mike<mailto:mike><http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike%3cmailto:mike%3e%3cmailto:mike%3cmailto:mike%3e>> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailt<http://rodenbaugh.com%3e%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailt> o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e>> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>><http://om.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/om.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3e> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><http://min.ch%3e%3chttp:/min.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cma> ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3e> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3e> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3e>> il.com<http://il.com><http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mail<http://il.com%3e%3chttp:/il.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmail> to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan>><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatan%3cmailto:gregshatan%3e%3cmailto:gregshatan%3cmailto:gregshatan%3e%3e> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>><mailto:ipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:ipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:ipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmail> to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3e>> r.net<http://r.net><http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i>><http://r.net%3e%3chttp:/r.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.i%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.i%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.i%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.i%3e%3e> nter.net<http://nter.net><http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll><http://nter.net%3e%3chttp:/nter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll%3cmailto:mmoll%3e%3cmailto:mmoll%3cmailto:mmoll%3e>> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><http://ca.inter.net%3e%3chttp:/ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmai> lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3e>> er.net<http://er.net><http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>><http://er.net%3e%3chttp:/er.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca%3cmailto:mmoll@ca%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca%3cmailto:mmoll@ca%3e%3e>. inter.net<http://inter.net><http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol><http://inter.net%3e%3chttp:/inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmol%3cmailto:mmol%3e%3cmailto:mmol%3cmailto:mmol%3e>> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>><mailto:l@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:l@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:l@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns><mailto:gns<mailto:gns>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gns%3cmailto:gns%3e%3cmailto:gns%3cmailto:gns%3e%3e> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>><http://om.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/om.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3e> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><http://min.ch%3e%3chttp:/min.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cma> ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mail<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmail> to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo>><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jo%3cmailto:Jo%3e%3cmailto:Jo%3cmailto:Jo%3e%3e> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e>>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci>><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3e%3e> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:o@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:o@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3e>> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>><http://akom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/akom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom%3e%3e>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi><http://admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi%3e>> n.ch<http://n.ch><http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><http://n.ch%3e%3chttp:/n.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>><http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e%3e> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mail<http://odenbaugh.com%3e%3chttp:/odenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmail> to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e%3e> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3e%3e> augh.com<http://augh.com><http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m><mailto:m<mailto:m><http://augh.com%3e%3chttp:/augh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:m%3cmailto:m%3e%3cmailto:m%3cmailto:m%3e>> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><ma<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cma> ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3e>> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e>> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto<http://odenbaugh.com%3e%3chttp:/odenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto>: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3c>< _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Hello Annebeth For the last few days I have been watching and reading the many and varied points that everyone has been raising. I have been trying to think of a way to map those graphically as I took to heart your point raised on a previous email about making sure our communications are “fair”. I have been coming up with a schematic idea of representing where there could be consensus or not to try to illustrate points of agreement/disagreement. For example, (and this is not meant to start a whole new fire storm of email). National law International law (the spacing is deliberate) Objection Non-objection Public policy IP rights/freedom of speech For those of us with short memories (like me today), I think it will help if we could come up with an “easy to read” system of where we may have reached consensus on some things and clearly not on others. I’m thinking of something like blue to the left…where some people sit…and pink to the right…where others sit...and somewhere there is green in the middle. Hopefully we all move to the middle of “least intolerable position” which enables us to move forward. I am not a fan of “least intolerable” because it isn’t necessarily the best decision BUT we operate in a consensus multi-stakeholder environment where no one party is going to “win”. For those of us that think we are “losing” we need to try harder to convince others of our position… I need to think this through some more and I would be grateful for some staff help on how to represent the schematic so I could show it to the broader group. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 12 May 2018, at 6:34 pm, Annebeth Lange <annebeth.lange@norid.no<mailto:annebeth.lange@norid.no>> wrote: Dear all Based on the experience from last round, the points raised By Chislain de Salins are worth noticing. A relevant question could be: If the requirement for a non-objection/support letter had not been implemented in the AGB 2012, would there have been more conflicts? Many cities are now in the root after having consultations with relevant governments. It is worth asking ourselves if there would have more problems, delays and court cases if things hadn’t been sorted out in advance. What Chislain writes below, that we don’t want a “policythat would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it challenged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks” – makes a lot of sense to me. I do not take stand as to how this should be solved, but I think it would be to the benefit of all stakeholders to avoid as many problems, court cases and delays as possible. This discussion, which as I have been following as a co-chair, has been intense and interesting and shows strongly different views. However, if we could pick the elements from both sides that will strengthen the policy for next round, we would all gain from that and at the same time strengthen us as an organization that shows how to work together. Kind regards, Annebeth From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr<mailto:ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr>> Date: Saturday, 12 May 2018 at 02:42 To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> Cc: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [***] Re: Conference call: city names Dear Greg, Yes, you’re right to point that there are different categories of things and that we should not confuse them. There is local law and international law. There is ICANN and the UN. Now, those categories being different doesn’t mean they’re not related, or that one could not articulate them. Just as ICANN doesn’t live in autarky, local and international law nourish and cross reference each other. International law is the product of national governments agreeing on common principles, with results ranging from biding treaties to soft law like declarations, recommendations, advice, etc. You’ll see that the courts decisions referenced in this thread (local law) actually have direct and indirect references to international law. Reciprocally, international law is built on concepts derived from national law especially courts decisions that often go much more into details and real life issues. There is ongoing work in UNESCO and WIPO on cultural heritage / geo names and how to protect them. And a national court may very well use those general frameworks to apply them to the domain names system. Think about how in 2014 the European court of justice found in a 1995 directive on privacy the basis for the right to be delisted on search engines (and I can tell you the word “such engine” does not appear in this directive just as the “DNS” doesn’t in some other sources of law...). So it would be dangerous and, in my opinion, a stretch to completely outline local laws from the discussion. First because local laws, at least so far, have been complied with by ICANN (think GDPR). And second because what an applicant wants above all is legal certainty (again, think GDPR and how much trouble could have been avoided if we tried to incorporate the law in the policy first instead of doing the opposite). So what we don’t want is a policy that would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it challenged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks. Anyway, let’s try to be open and not think only with binary views and extreme postions. Best GDS ________________________________________ De : Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] de la part de Greg Shatan [gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Envoyé : vendredi 11 mai 2018 19:57 À : Robin Gross Cc : gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Objet : [***] Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I agree 100% with Robin. ICANN is not bound to follow every local law in the world. All law is not “applicable” to ICANN. Echoing Robin, I’m not sure if this is willful or ignorant (or willfully ignorant).... The subtext here is that local law that supports a certain position (or fulfills a certain wish) is “applicable,” but all the rest isn’t. That is not an intellectually sustainable position. Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org><mailto:robin@ipjustice.org><mailto:robin@ipjustice.org%3e>> wrote: There seems to a massive conflation by some of the term “local law” with the term “international law”. Local law applies locally. If local law applied internationally, it would be called "international law". But it isn’t. It is called local law, because it only applies locally, not internationally. I’m disappointed by the attempts by some govts to pretend like these two entirely different concepts have the same meaning and the same effect globally. It is either ignorance or an attempt to mislead. Either way, it is troubling. Best, Robin On May 9, 2018, at 10:35 PM,Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote: Dear Paul Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows. Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows. These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities. And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws. Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right. But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided... Best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com><mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com><mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com%3e>> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3e>> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e>>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e>) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Jorge, Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article: "Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction." Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech. Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks! Best, Paul On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3e%3cmailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3cmailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3e%3e>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e>> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect? On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Jorge, Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)? Thanks, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3e%3e> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new>><mailto:nces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nces@icann.org%3cmailto:nces@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-new%3cmailto:gnso-new%3e%3cmailto:gnso-new%3cmailto:gnso-new%3e%3e> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e%3e> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3e> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3e> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c<http://www.lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucernefoods.c> om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/lucernefoods.com>> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucerne.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucerne.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucerne.com>> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3e> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><http://kom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3chttp://kom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>><http://admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/admin.ch%3e%3e>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3e> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3e> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.william%3cmailto:liz.william%3e%3cmailto:liz.william%3cmailto:liz.william%3e%3e> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org><mailto:s@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:s@auda.org.au%3cmailto:s@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3e>> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto>: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a<http://www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.a> uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/uda.org.au%3e>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3e> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3e> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmail> to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmai> lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com><http://France.com<http://france.com/>>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>><http://om.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/om.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3e> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><http://min.ch%3e%3chttp:/min.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cma> ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike><mailto:mike<mailto:mike><http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike%3cmailto:mike%3e%3cmailto:mike%3cmailto:mike%3e>> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailt<http://rodenbaugh.com%3e%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailt> o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e>> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>><http://om.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/om.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3e> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><http://min.ch%3e%3chttp:/min.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cma> ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3e> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3e> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3e>> il.com<http://il.com><http://il.com><http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mail<http://il.com%3e%3chttp:/il.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmail> to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan>><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatan%3cmailto:gregshatan%3e%3cmailto:gregshatan%3cmailto:gregshatan%3e%3e> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>><mailto:ipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:ipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:ipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmail> to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3e>> r.net<http://r.net><http://r.net><http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i>><http://r.net%3e%3chttp:/r.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.i%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.i%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.i%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.i%3e%3e> nter.net<http://nter.net><http://nter.net><http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll><http://nter.net%3e%3chttp:/nter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll%3cmailto:mmoll%3e%3cmailto:mmoll%3cmailto:mmoll%3e>> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><http://ca.inter.net%3e%3chttp:/ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmai> lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3e>> er.net<http://er.net><http://er.net><http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>><http://er.net%3e%3chttp:/er.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca%3cmailto:mmoll@ca%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca%3cmailto:mmoll@ca%3e%3e>. inter.net<http://inter.net><http://inter.net><http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol><http://inter.net%3e%3chttp:/inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmol%3cmailto:mmol%3e%3cmailto:mmol%3cmailto:mmol%3e>> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>><mailto:l@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:l@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:l@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns><mailto:gns<mailto:gns>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gns%3cmailto:gns%3e%3cmailto:gns%3cmailto:gns%3e%3e> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>><http://om.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/om.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3e> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><http://min.ch%3e%3chttp:/min.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cma> ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mail<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmail> to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo>><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jo%3cmailto:Jo%3e%3cmailto:Jo%3cmailto:Jo%3e%3e> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e>>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci>><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3e%3e> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:o@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:o@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3e>> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>><http://akom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/akom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom%3e%3e>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi><http://admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi%3e>> n.ch<http://n.ch><http://n.ch><http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><http://n.ch%3e%3chttp:/n.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>><http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e%3e> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mail<http://odenbaugh.com%3e%3chttp:/odenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmail> to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e%3e> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3e%3e> augh.com<http://augh.com><http://augh.com><http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m><mailto:m<mailto:m><http://augh.com%3e%3chttp:/augh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:m%3cmailto:m%3e%3cmailto:m%3cmailto:m%3e>> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><ma<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cma> ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3e>> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e>> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto<http://odenbaugh.com%3e%3chttp:/odenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto>: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3c>< _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Liz, thanks truly. Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 12, 2018, at 4:55 AM, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello Annebeth
For the last few days I have been watching and reading the many and varied points that everyone has been raising. I have been trying to think of a way to map those graphically as I took to heart your point raised on a previous email about making sure our communications are “fair”.
I have been coming up with a schematic idea of representing where there could be consensus or not to try to illustrate points of agreement/disagreement.
For example, (and this is not meant to start a whole new fire storm of email).
National law International law (the spacing is deliberate) Objection Non-objection Public policy IP rights/freedom of speech
For those of us with short memories (like me today), I think it will help if we could come up with an “easy to read” system of where we may have reached consensus on some things and clearly not on others. I’m thinking of something like blue to the left…where some people sit…and pink to the right…where others sit...and somewhere there is green in the middle. Hopefully we all move to the middle of “least intolerable position” which enables us to move forward. I am not a fan of “least intolerable” because it isn’t necessarily the best decision BUT we operate in a consensus multi-stakeholder environment where no one party is going to “win”. For those of us that think we are “losing” we need to try harder to convince others of our position…
I need to think this through some more and I would be grateful for some staff help on how to represent the schematic so I could show it to the broader group.
Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 12 May 2018, at 6:34 pm, Annebeth Lange <annebeth.lange@norid.no> wrote:
Dear all
Based on the experience from last round, the points raised By Chislain de Salins are worth noticing.
A relevant question could be: If the requirement for a non-objection/support letter had not been implemented in the AGB 2012, would there have been more conflicts? Many cities are now in the root after having consultations with relevant governments. It is worth asking ourselves if there would have more problems, delays and court cases if things hadn’t been sorted out in advance.
What Chislain writes below, that we don’t want a “policythat would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it challenged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks” – makes a lot of sense to me.
I do not take stand as to how this should be solved, but I think it would be to the benefit of all stakeholders to avoid as many problems, court cases and delays as possible.
This discussion, which as I have been following as a co-chair, has been intense and interesting and shows strongly different views. However, if we could pick the elements from both sides that will strengthen the policy for next round, we would all gain from that and at the same time strengthen us as an organization that shows how to work together.
Kind regards, Annebeth
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr> Date: Saturday, 12 May 2018 at 02:42 To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> Cc: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [***] Re: Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
Yes, you’re right to point that there are different categories of things and that we should not confuse them. There is local law and international law. There is ICANN and the UN.
Now, those categories being different doesn’t mean they’re not related, or that one could not articulate them. Just as ICANN doesn’t live in autarky, local and international law nourish and cross reference each other. International law is the product of national governments agreeing on common principles, with results ranging from biding treaties to soft law like declarations, recommendations, advice, etc. You’ll see that the courts decisions referenced in this thread (local law) actually have direct and indirect references to international law. Reciprocally, international law is built on concepts derived from national law especially courts decisions that often go much more into details and real life issues. There is ongoing work in UNESCO and WIPO on cultural heritage / geo names and how to protect them. And a national court may very well use those general frameworks to apply them to the domain names system. Think about how in 2014 the European court of justice found in a 1995 directive on privacy the basis for the right to be delisted on search engines (and I can tell you the word “such engine” does not appear in this directive just as the “DNS” doesn’t in some other sources of law...).
So it would be dangerous and, in my opinion, a stretch to completely outline local laws from the discussion. First because local laws, at least so far, have been complied with by ICANN (think GDPR). And second because what an applicant wants above all is legal certainty (again, think GDPR and how much trouble could have been avoided if we tried to incorporate the law in the policy first instead of doing the opposite). So what we don’t want is a policy that would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it challenged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks.
Anyway, let’s try to be open and not think only with binary views and extreme postions.
Best
GDS
________________________________________ De : Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] de la part de Greg Shatan [gregshatanipc@gmail.com] Envoyé : vendredi 11 mai 2018 19:57 À : Robin Gross Cc : gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Objet : [***] Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I agree 100% with Robin.
ICANN is not bound to follow every local law in the world. All law is not “applicable” to ICANN. Echoing Robin, I’m not sure if this is willful or ignorant (or willfully ignorant).... The subtext here is that local law that supports a certain position (or fulfills a certain wish) is “applicable,” but all the rest isn’t. That is not an intellectually sustainable position.
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> wrote: There seems to a massive conflation by some of the term “local law” with the term “international law”. Local law applies locally. If local law applied internationally, it would be called "international law". But it isn’t. It is called local law, because it only applies locally, not internationally. I’m disappointed by the attempts by some govts to pretend like these two entirely different concepts have the same meaning and the same effect globally. It is either ignorance or an attempt to mislead. Either way, it is troubling.
Best, Robin
On May 9, 2018, at 10:35 PM,Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Paul
Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows.
Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows.
These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities.
And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws.
Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right.
But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided...
Best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com>> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Jorge,
Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article:
"Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction."
Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech.
Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks!
Best, Paul
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin<alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect?
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>> wrote: Jorge,
Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)?
Thanks,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin<alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou>> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new>> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><http://kom. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william>> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org>> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike><mailto:mike<mailto:mike>> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma>> il.com<http://il.com><http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan>> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte>> r.net<http://r.net><http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i>> nter.net<http://nter.net><http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll>> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int>> er.net<http://er.net><http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>>. inter.net<http://inter.net><http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol>> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns><mailto:gns<mailto:gns>> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo>> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci>> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b>> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi>> n.ch<http://n.ch><http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>
>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb>> augh.com<http://augh.com><http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m><mailto:m<mailto:m>> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh>> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><<
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Annebeth, I would like to caution that the mechanics for gTLD applications will substantially change in the next round! In 2012 we had mostly ICANN folks spearheading efforts – and for the most part they knew what they do! In 2020 we will face for example: * VC funded portfolio applicants trying to “wipe out” entire categories – e.g. all cities with more than 500,000 people! The goal is to “make money” – not to operate a resourceful city infrastructure element. * Applicants who have ZERO ties to the DNS business – but assume it should be easy to run a gTLD for their city (until they find out: it is actually not easy) The “danger” for the both constituencies “Internet User” and “prospective city gTLD registrant” in a given city is that absence of management for the string will render it impotent. A city gTLD should be MANAGED! Not just “opened up for registration”. Vetting requirements create a very useful real “competition” – as applicants will have to answer to the city’s RFP! Geo gTLDs will together with “brand” gTLDs THE main silo in the future. Especially attractive for land-grabbers as these TLDs have a “built in” natural demand – AND there are lots of entities within the cities who might later buy the TLD operator. We should make sure to protect the city gTLD land from being subjected to wild speculation phantasies of ROI hungry VCs. How do I know all this? I have been involved in at least three city gTLD applications in 2012 – and I am preparing for geo gTLD applications for the 2nd round since 2011/2012. Obviously I am analyzing the “teething troubles” of the 1st small batch of city gTLDs – and am in close negotiations with constituencies in cities who wish to fund, market and manage their own city’s gTLD – instead leaving that to a VC funded entity that needs to make cash rather than creating benefit for the geo community. Thanks, Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Annebeth Lange Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2018 11:34 AM To: DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr>; Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [***] Re: Conference call: city names Dear all Based on the experience from last round, the points raised By Chislain de Salins are worth noticing. A relevant question could be: If the requirement for a non-objection/support letter had not been implemented in the AGB 2012, would there have been more conflicts? Many cities are now in the root after having consultations with relevant governments. It is worth asking ourselves if there would have more problems, delays and court cases if things hadn’t been sorted out in advance. What Chislain writes below, that we don’t want a “policy that would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it challenged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks” – makes a lot of sense to me. I do not take stand as to how this should be solved, but I think it would be to the benefit of all stakeholders to avoid as many problems, court cases and delays as possible. This discussion, which as I have been following as a co-chair, has been intense and interesting and shows strongly different views. However, if we could pick the elements from both sides that will strengthen the policy for next round, we would all gain from that and at the same time strengthen us as an organization that shows how to work together. Kind regards, Annebeth From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> > on behalf of DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr <mailto:ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr> > Date: Saturday, 12 May 2018 at 02:42 To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> >, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org <mailto:robin@ipjustice.org> > Cc: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> " <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [***] Re: Conference call: city names Dear Greg, Yes, you’re right to point that there are different categories of things and that we should not confuse them. There is local law and international law. There is ICANN and the UN. Now, those categories being different doesn’t mean they’re not related, or that one could not articulate them. Just as ICANN doesn’t live in autarky, local and international law nourish and cross reference each other. International law is the product of national governments agreeing on common principles, with results ranging from biding treaties to soft law like declarations, recommendations, advice, etc. You’ll see that the courts decisions referenced in this thread (local law) actually have direct and indirect references to international law. Reciprocally, international law is built on concepts derived from national law especially courts decisions that often go much more into details and real life issues. There is ongoing work in UNESCO and WIPO on cultural heritage / geo names and how to protect them. And a national court may very well use those general frameworks to apply them to the domain names system. Think about how in 2014 the European court of justice found in a 1995 directive on privacy the basis for the right to be delisted on search engines (and I can tell you the word “such engine” does not appear in this directive just as the “DNS” doesn’t in some other sources of law...). So it would be dangerous and, in my opinion, a stretch to completely outline local laws from the discussion. First because local laws, at least so far, have been complied with by ICANN (think GDPR). And second because what an applicant wants above all is legal certainty (again, think GDPR and how much trouble could have been avoided if we tried to incorporate the law in the policy first instead of doing the opposite). So what we don’t want is a policy that would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it challenged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks. Anyway, let’s try to be open and not think only with binary views and extreme postions. Best GDS ________________________________________ De : Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [ <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] de la part de Greg Shatan [ <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> gregshatanipc@gmail.com] Envoyé : vendredi 11 mai 2018 19:57 À : Robin Gross Cc : <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Objet : [***] Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I agree 100% with Robin. ICANN is not bound to follow every local law in the world. All law is not “applicable” to ICANN. Echoing Robin, I’m not sure if this is willful or ignorant (or willfully ignorant).... The subtext here is that local law that supports a certain position (or fulfills a certain wish) is “applicable,” but all the rest isn’t. That is not an intellectually sustainable position. Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM Robin Gross < <mailto:robin@ipjustice.org> robin@ipjustice.org< <mailto:robin@ipjustice.org%3e> mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> wrote: There seems to a massive conflation by some of the term “local law” with the term “international law”. Local law applies locally. If local law applied internationally, it would be called "international law". But it isn’t. It is called local law, because it only applies locally, not internationally. I’m disappointed by the attempts by some govts to pretend like these two entirely different concepts have the same meaning and the same effect globally. It is either ignorance or an attempt to mislead. Either way, it is troubling. Best, Robin On May 9, 2018, at 10:35 PM, <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote: Dear Paul Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows. Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows. These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities. And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws. Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right. But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided... Best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul McGrady < <mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com> mcgradygnso@gmail.com< <mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com%3e> mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com>> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig < <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com< <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3e> mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, Greg Shatan ( <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>) < <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Jorge, Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article: "Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction." Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech. Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks! Best, Paul On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig < <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com< <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3e%3cmailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3cmailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3e%3e> mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> On Behalf Of <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Cc: <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan < <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> alexander@schubert.berlin < <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> alexander@schubert.berlin>, <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect? On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan < <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>> wrote: Jorge, Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)? Thanks, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan < <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> alexander@schubert.berlin < <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert < <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [ <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3e%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou>> <mailto:nces@icann.org> nces@icann.org< <mailto:nces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nces@icann.org%3cmailto:nces@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-new%3cmailto:gnso-new%3e%3cmailto:gnso-new%3cmailto:gnso-new%3e%3e> mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new>> <mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org< <mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e%3e> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>> <mailto:.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e> mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e> mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [ <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3e> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>> <mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com> hatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Liz Williams < <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> liz.williams@auda.org.au< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3e> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>> <mailto:ms@auda.org.au> ms@auda.org.au< <mailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com< <http://www.lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/www.l...> http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com< <http://lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/lucernefoods....> http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com< <http://www.lucerne.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucerne.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucerne.com...> http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [ <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3e> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>> <mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com> hatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3chttp://kom> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><http://kom. admin.ch< <http://admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/admin.ch%3e%3e> http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams < <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> liz.williams@auda.org.au< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3e> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>> <mailto:ms@auda.org.au> ms@auda.org.au< <mailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams < <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> liz.williams@auda.org.au< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3e> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>> <mailto:ms@auda.org.au> ms@auda.org.au< <mailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> liz.williams@auda.org.au< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.william%3cmailto:liz.william%3e%3cmailto:liz.william%3cmailto:liz.william%3e%3e> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william>> <mailto:s@auda.org.au> s@auda.org.au< <mailto:s@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:s@auda.org.au%3cmailto:s@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3e> mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org>> .au< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> liz.williams@auda.org.au< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> www.auda.org.au< <http://www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au...> http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au< <http://uda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/uda.org.au%3e> http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh < <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mike@rodenbaugh.com< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com< <http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:...> http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 <http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e> mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch> ncio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch< <http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak...> http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh < <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mike@rodenbaugh.com< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com< <http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:...> http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e> mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch> ncio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch< <http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak...> http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan < <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3e> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>> <mailto:c@gmail.com> c@gmail.com< <mailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e> mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3e> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>> <mailto:atanipc@gmail.com> atanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmail> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail to: <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e> mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> < <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> < <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmai> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai lto: <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e> mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> < <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>, <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e> mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com< <http://France.com> http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 <http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e> mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch> ncio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch< <http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak...> http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>> om.admin.ch< <http://om.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/om.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.adm...> http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>> min.ch< <http://min.ch%3e%3chttp:/min.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cma...> http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>. ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cma> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma ilto: <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh < <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mike@rodenbaugh.com< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com< <http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:...> http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike><mailto:mike<mailto:mike>> @rodenbaugh.com< <http://rodenbaugh.com%3e%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh....> http://rodenbaugh.com><http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailt o: <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mike@rodenbaugh.com< <mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e> mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>> m>< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e> mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch> ncio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch< <http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak...> http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>> om.admin.ch< <http://om.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/om.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.adm...> http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>> min.ch< <http://min.ch%3e%3chttp:/min.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cma...> http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>. ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cma> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma ilto: <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan < <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3e> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>> <mailto:c@gmail.com> c@gmail.com< <mailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e> mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3e> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>> <mailto:atanipc@gmail.com> atanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3e> mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma>> il.com< <http://il.com%3e%3chttp:/il.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmai...> http://il.com><http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mail to: <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatan%3cmailto:gregshatan%3e%3cmailto:gregshatan%3cmailto:gregshatan%3e%3e> mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan>> <mailto:ipc@gmail.com> ipc@gmail.com< <mailto:ipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:ipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:ipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>>, <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmail> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail to: <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e> mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> < <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3e> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte>> r.net< <http://r.net%3e%3chttp:/r.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@...> http://r.net><http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i>> nter.net< <http://nter.net%3e%3chttp:/nter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cm...> http://nter.net><http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll>> @ca.inter.net< <http://ca.inter.net%3e%3chttp:/ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3...> http://ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> < <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmai> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai lto: <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e> mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> < <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3e> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int>> er.net< <http://er.net%3e%3chttp:/er.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmol...> http://er.net><http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>>. inter.net< <http://inter.net%3e%3chttp:/inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3...> http://inter.net><http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol>> <mailto:l@ca.inter.net> l@ca.inter.net< <mailto:l@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:l@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:l@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>>, <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e> mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e> mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e> mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gns%3cmailto:gns%3e%3cmailto:gns%3cmailto:gns%3e%3e> mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns><mailto:gns<mailto:gns>> <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto> mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto: <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e> mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 <http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e> mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch> ncio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch< <http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak...> http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>> om.admin.ch< <http://om.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/om.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.adm...> http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>> min.ch< <http://min.ch%3e%3chttp:/min.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cma...> http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>. ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cma> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma ilto: <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmail> mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mail to: <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jo%3cmailto:Jo%3e%3cmailto:Jo%3cmailto:Jo%3e%3e> mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo>> <mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e> mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>>. <mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3e%3e> mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci>> <mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch> o@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:o@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:o@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3e> mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b>> akom.admin.ch< <http://akom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/akom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@ba...> http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>>. admin.ch< <http://admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.adm...> http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi>> n.ch< <http://n.ch%3e%3chttp:/n.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmai...> http://n.ch><http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [ <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com< <http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mik...> http://gh.com><http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>> odenbaugh.com< <http://odenbaugh.com%3e%3chttp:/odenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh...> http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mail to: <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mike@rodenbaugh.com< <mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e%3e> mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>> m< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3e%3e> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb>> augh.com< <http://augh.com%3e%3chttp:/augh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmai...> http://augh.com><http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m><mailto:m<mailto:m>> <mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com> ike@rodenbaugh.com< <mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cma> mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><ma ilto: <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mike@rodenbaugh.com< <mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3e> mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh>> .com>< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>> odenbaugh.com< <http://odenbaugh.com%3e%3chttp:/odenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co...> http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto: <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mike@rodenbaugh.com< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> < <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3c> mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><< _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Hi Alexander Thanks for your information, Alexander. Noted. Kind regards Annebeth From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> Reply-To: "alexander@schubert.berlin" <alexander@schubert.berlin> Date: Monday, 14 May 2018 at 21:22 To: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [***] Re: Conference call: city names Dear Annebeth, I would like to caution that the mechanics for gTLD applications will substantially change in the next round! In 2012 we had mostly ICANN folks spearheading efforts – and for the most part they knew what they do! In 2020 we will face for example: * VC funded portfolio applicants trying to “wipe out” entire categories – e.g. all cities with more than 500,000 people! The goal is to “make money” – not to operate a resourceful city infrastructure element. * Applicants who have ZERO ties to the DNS business – but assume it should be easy to run a gTLD for their city (until they find out: it is actually not easy) The “danger” for the both constituencies “Internet User” and “prospective city gTLD registrant” in a given city is that absence of management for the string will render it impotent. A city gTLD should be MANAGED! Not just “opened up for registration”. Vetting requirements create a very useful real “competition” – as applicants will have to answer to the city’s RFP! Geo gTLDs will together with “brand” gTLDs THE main silo in the future. Especially attractive for land-grabbers as these TLDs have a “built in” natural demand – AND there are lots of entities within the cities who might later buy the TLD operator. We should make sure to protect the city gTLD land from being subjected to wild speculation phantasies of ROI hungry VCs. How do I know all this? I have been involved in at least three city gTLD applications in 2012 – and I am preparing for geo gTLD applications for the 2nd round since 2011/2012. Obviously I am analyzing the “teething troubles” of the 1st small batch of city gTLDs – and am in close negotiations with constituencies in cities who wish to fund, market and manage their own city’s gTLD – instead leaving that to a VC funded entity that needs to make cash rather than creating benefit for the geo community. Thanks, Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Annebeth Lange Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2018 11:34 AM To: DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr>; Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [***] Re: Conference call: city names Dear all Based on the experience from last round, the points raised By Chislain de Salins are worth noticing. A relevant question could be: If the requirement for a non-objection/support letter had not been implemented in the AGB 2012, would there have been more conflicts? Many cities are now in the root after having consultations with relevant governments. It is worth asking ourselves if there would have more problems, delays and court cases if things hadn’t been sorted out in advance. What Chislain writes below, that we don’t want a “policy that would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it challenged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks” – makes a lot of sense to me. I do not take stand as to how this should be solved, but I think it would be to the benefit of all stakeholders to avoid as many problems, court cases and delays as possible. This discussion, which as I have been following as a co-chair, has been intense and interesting and shows strongly different views. However, if we could pick the elements from both sides that will strengthen the policy for next round, we would all gain from that and at the same time strengthen us as an organization that shows how to work together. Kind regards, Annebeth From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr<mailto:ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr>> Date: Saturday, 12 May 2018 at 02:42 To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> Cc: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [***] Re: Conference call: city names Dear Greg, Yes, you’re right to point that there are different categories of things and that we should not confuse them. There is local law and international law. There is ICANN and the UN. Now, those categories being different doesn’t mean they’re not related, or that one could not articulate them. Just as ICANN doesn’t live in autarky, local and international law nourish and cross reference each other. International law is the product of national governments agreeing on common principles, with results ranging from biding treaties to soft law like declarations, recommendations, advice, etc. You’ll see that the courts decisions referenced in this thread (local law) actually have direct and indirect references to international law. Reciprocally, international law is built on concepts derived from national law especially courts decisions that often go much more into details and real life issues. There is ongoing work in UNESCO and WIPO on cultural heritage / geo names and how to protect them. And a national court may very well use those general frameworks to apply them to the domain names system. Think about how in 2014 the European court of justice found in a 1995 directive on privacy the basis for the right to be delisted on search engines (and I can tell you the word “such engine” does not appear in this directive just as the “DNS” doesn’t in some other sources of law...). So it would be dangerous and, in my opinion, a stretch to completely outline local laws from the discussion. First because local laws, at least so far, have been complied with by ICANN (think GDPR). And second because what an applicant wants above all is legal certainty (again, think GDPR and how much trouble could have been avoided if we tried to incorporate the law in the policy first instead of doing the opposite). So what we don’t want is a policy that would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it challenged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks. Anyway, let’s try to be open and not think only with binary views and extreme postions. Best GDS ________________________________________ De : Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] de la part de Greg Shatan [gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Envoyé : vendredi 11 mai 2018 19:57 À : Robin Gross Cc : gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Objet : [***] Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I agree 100% with Robin. ICANN is not bound to follow every local law in the world. All law is not “applicable” to ICANN. Echoing Robin, I’m not sure if this is willful or ignorant (or willfully ignorant).... The subtext here is that local law that supports a certain position (or fulfills a certain wish) is “applicable,” but all the rest isn’t. That is not an intellectually sustainable position. Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org><mailto:robin@ipjustice.org><mailto:robin@ipjustice.org%3e>> wrote: There seems to a massive conflation by some of the term “local law” with the term “international law”. Local law applies locally. If local law applied internationally, it would be called "international law". But it isn’t. It is called local law, because it only applies locally, not internationally. I’m disappointed by the attempts by some govts to pretend like these two entirely different concepts have the same meaning and the same effect globally. It is either ignorance or an attempt to mislead. Either way, it is troubling. Best, Robin On May 9, 2018, at 10:35 PM, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote: Dear Paul Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows. Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows. These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities. And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws. Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right. But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided... Best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com><mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com><mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com%3e>> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3e>> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e>>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e>) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Jorge, Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article: "Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction." Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech. Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks! Best, Paul On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3e%3cmailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3cmailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3e%3e>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e>> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect? On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Jorge, Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)? Thanks, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3e%3e> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new>><mailto:nces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nces@icann.org%3cmailto:nces@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-new%3cmailto:gnso-new%3e%3cmailto:gnso-new%3cmailto:gnso-new%3e%3e> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e%3e> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3e> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3e> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c<http://www.lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucernefoods.c> om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/lucernefoods.com>> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucerne.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucerne.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucerne.com>> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3e> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><http://kom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3chttp://kom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>><http://admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/admin.ch%3e%3e>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3e> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3e> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.william%3cmailto:liz.william%3e%3cmailto:liz.william%3cmailto:liz.william%3e%3e> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org><mailto:s@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:s@auda.org.au%3cmailto:s@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3e>> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto>: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a<http://www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.a> uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/uda.org.au%3e>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3e> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3e> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmail> to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmai> lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>><http://om.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/om.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3e> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><http://min.ch%3e%3chttp:/min.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cma> ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike><mailto:mike<mailto:mike><http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike%3cmailto:mike%3e%3cmailto:mike%3cmailto:mike%3e>> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailt<http://rodenbaugh.com%3e%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailt> o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e>> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>><http://om.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/om.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3e> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><http://min.ch%3e%3chttp:/min.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cma> ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3e> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3e> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3e>> il.com<http://il.com><http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mail<http://il.com%3e%3chttp:/il.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmail> to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan>><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatan%3cmailto:gregshatan%3e%3cmailto:gregshatan%3cmailto:gregshatan%3e%3e> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>><mailto:ipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:ipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:ipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmail> to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3e>> r.net<http://r.net><http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i>><http://r.net%3e%3chttp:/r.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.i%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.i%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.i%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.i%3e%3e> nter.net<http://nter.net><http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll><http://nter.net%3e%3chttp:/nter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll%3cmailto:mmoll%3e%3cmailto:mmoll%3cmailto:mmoll%3e>> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><http://ca.inter.net%3e%3chttp:/ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmai> lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3e>> er.net<http://er.net><http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>><http://er.net%3e%3chttp:/er.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca%3cmailto:mmoll@ca%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca%3cmailto:mmoll@ca%3e%3e>. inter.net<http://inter.net><http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol><http://inter.net%3e%3chttp:/inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmol%3cmailto:mmol%3e%3cmailto:mmol%3cmailto:mmol%3e>> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>><mailto:l@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:l@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:l@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns><mailto:gns<mailto:gns>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gns%3cmailto:gns%3e%3cmailto:gns%3cmailto:gns%3e%3e> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>><http://om.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/om.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3e> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><http://min.ch%3e%3chttp:/min.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cma> ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mail<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmail> to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo>><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jo%3cmailto:Jo%3e%3cmailto:Jo%3cmailto:Jo%3e%3e> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e>>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci>><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3e%3e> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:o@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:o@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3e>> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>><http://akom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/akom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom%3e%3e>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi><http://admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi%3e>> n.ch<http://n.ch><http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><http://n.ch%3e%3chttp:/n.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>><http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e%3e> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mail<http://odenbaugh.com%3e%3chttp:/odenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmail> to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e%3e> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3e%3e> augh.com<http://augh.com><http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m><mailto:m<mailto:m><http://augh.com%3e%3chttp:/augh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:m%3cmailto:m%3e%3cmailto:m%3cmailto:m%3e>> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><ma<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cma> ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3e>> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e>> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto<http://odenbaugh.com%3e%3chttp:/odenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto>: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3c>< _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Hello Alexander I have been reading your recent posts about the possibilities of the next round (whether that is 2020 or not doesn’t matter). I think we need to be very cautious about some of the points you’ve made which sound like attempts to prohibit certain types of applicants from applying for top level domains. I don’t think it is supportable to claim that "In 2020 we will face for example: • VC funded portfolio applicants trying to “wipe out” entire categories – e.g. all cities with more than 500,000 people! The goal is to “make money” – not to operate a resourceful city infrastructure element. • Applicants who have ZERO ties to the DNS business – but assume it should be easy to run a gTLD for their city (until they find out: it is actually not easy)” It is up to applicants to adequately fund their operations (noting that many have failed for numerous reasons). It is not up to the ICANN application system to tell mature businesses what they should or shouldn’t be investing in. Why wouldn’t a sensible business who invests in TLDs not want to make money? The “danger” for the both constituencies “Internet User” and “prospective city gTLD registrant” in a given city is that absence of management for the string will render it impotent. A city gTLD should be MANAGED! Not just “opened up for registration”. And why wouldn’t a sensible investor want to manage its business? We can’t be in the game of telling applicants how they run their businesses? Vetting requirements create a very useful real “competition” – as applicants will have to answer to the city’s RFP! This is challenge…You have said that applicants have to answer a city’s RFP? Why? Isn’t this an ICANN process? Geo gTLDs will together with “brand” gTLDs THE main silo in the future. Especially attractive for land-grabbers as these TLDs have a “built in” natural demand – AND there are lots of entities within the cities who might later buy the TLD operator. We should make sure to protect the city gTLD land from being subjected to wild speculation phantasies of ROI hungry VCs. Which "ROI hungry VCs" are you referring to? Who are the land-grabbers? Do you mean your potentially competing applicants for strings that you also might be interested in? Contention sets for the same strings were a known problem in the last round. Contention resolution was not a pretty process but everyone knew what they were getting into after the string applications had been revealed. That has, however, nothing to do with coming up with policy recommendations for geographic names. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 15 May 2018, at 12:06 am, Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> wrote: Dear Annebeth, I would like to caution that the mechanics for gTLD applications will substantially change in the next round! In 2012 we had mostly ICANN folks spearheading efforts – and for the most part they knew what they do! In 2020 we will face for example: • VC funded portfolio applicants trying to “wipe out” entire categories – e.g. all cities with more than 500,000 people! The goal is to “make money” – not to operate a resourceful city infrastructure element. • Applicants who have ZERO ties to the DNS business – but assume it should be easy to run a gTLD for their city (until they find out: it is actually not easy) The “danger” for the both constituencies “Internet User” and “prospective city gTLD registrant” in a given city is that absence of management for the string will render it impotent. A city gTLD should be MANAGED! Not just “opened up for registration”. Vetting requirements create a very useful real “competition” – as applicants will have to answer to the city’s RFP! Geo gTLDs will together with “brand” gTLDs THE main silo in the future. Especially attractive for land-grabbers as these TLDs have a “built in” natural demand – AND there are lots of entities within the cities who might later buy the TLD operator. We should make sure to protect the city gTLD land from being subjected to wild speculation phantasies of ROI hungry VCs. How do I know all this? I have been involved in at least three city gTLD applications in 2012 – and I am preparing for geo gTLD applications for the 2nd round since 2011/2012. Obviously I am analyzing the “teething troubles” of the 1st small batch of city gTLDs – and am in close negotiations with constituencies in cities who wish to fund, market and manage their own city’s gTLD – instead leaving that to a VC funded entity that needs to make cash rather than creating benefit for the geo community. Thanks, Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Annebeth Lange Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2018 11:34 AM To: DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr<mailto:ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr>>; Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>; Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [***] Re: Conference call: city names Dear all Based on the experience from last round, the points raised By Chislain de Salins are worth noticing. A relevant question could be: If the requirement for a non-objection/support letter had not been implemented in the AGB 2012, would there have been more conflicts? Many cities are now in the root after having consultations with relevant governments. It is worth asking ourselves if there would have more problems, delays and court cases if things hadn’t been sorted out in advance. What Chislain writes below, that we don’t want a “policythat would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it challenged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks” – makes a lot of sense to me. I do not take stand as to how this should be solved, but I think it would be to the benefit of all stakeholders to avoid as many problems, court cases and delays as possible. This discussion, which as I have been following as a co-chair, has been intense and interesting and shows strongly different views. However, if we could pick the elements from both sides that will strengthen the policy for next round, we would all gain from that and at the same time strengthen us as an organization that shows how to work together. Kind regards, Annebeth From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr<mailto:ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr>> Date: Saturday, 12 May 2018 at 02:42 To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> Cc: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [***] Re: Conference call: city names Dear Greg, Yes, you’re right to point that there are different categories of things and that we should not confuse them. There is local law and international law. There is ICANN and the UN. Now, those categories being different doesn’t mean they’re not related, or that one could not articulate them. Just as ICANN doesn’t live in autarky, local and international law nourish and cross reference each other. International law is the product of national governments agreeing on common principles, with results ranging from biding treaties to soft law like declarations, recommendations, advice, etc. You’ll see that the courts decisions referenced in this thread (local law) actually have direct and indirect references to international law. Reciprocally, international law is built on concepts derived from national law especially courts decisions that often go much more into details and real life issues. There is ongoing work in UNESCO and WIPO on cultural heritage / geo names and how to protect them. And a national court may very well use those general frameworks to apply them to the domain names system. Think about how in 2014 the European court of justice found in a 1995 directive on privacy the basis for the right to be delisted on search engines (and I can tell you the word “such engine” does not appear in this directive just as the “DNS” doesn’t in some other sources of law...). So it would be dangerous and, in my opinion, a stretch to completely outline local laws from the discussion. First because local laws, at least so far, have been complied with by ICANN (think GDPR). And second because what an applicant wants above all is legal certainty (again, think GDPR and how much trouble could have been avoided if we tried to incorporate the law in the policy first instead of doing the opposite). So what we don’t want is a policy that would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it challenged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks. Anyway, let’s try to be open and not think only with binary views and extreme postions. Best GDS ________________________________________ De : Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] de la part de Greg Shatan [gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Envoyé : vendredi 11 mai 2018 19:57 À : Robin Gross Cc : gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Objet : [***] Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I agree 100% with Robin. ICANN is not bound to follow every local law in the world. All law is not “applicable” to ICANN. Echoing Robin, I’m not sure if this is willful or ignorant (or willfully ignorant).... The subtext here is that local law that supports a certain position (or fulfills a certain wish) is “applicable,” but all the rest isn’t. That is not an intellectually sustainable position. Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org><mailto:robin@ipjustice.org><mailto:robin@ipjustice.org%3e>> wrote: There seems to a massive conflation by some of the term “local law” with the term “international law”. Local law applies locally. If local law applied internationally, it would be called "international law". But it isn’t. It is called local law, because it only applies locally, not internationally. I’m disappointed by the attempts by some govts to pretend like these two entirely different concepts have the same meaning and the same effect globally. It is either ignorance or an attempt to mislead. Either way, it is troubling. Best, Robin On May 9, 2018, at 10:35 PM, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote: Dear Paul Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows. Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows. These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities. And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws. Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right. But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided... Best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com><mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com><mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com%3e>> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3e>> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e>>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e>) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Jorge, Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article: "Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction." Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech. Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks! Best, Paul On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3e%3cmailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3cmailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com%3e%3e>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 -----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e>> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect? On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Jorge, Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)? Thanks, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Alexander, You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE. When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> wrote: Greg, Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked). And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them. Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou%3e%3e> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new>><mailto:nces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nces@icann.org%3cmailto:nces@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-new%3cmailto:gnso-new%3e%3cmailto:gnso-new%3cmailto:gnso-new%3e%3e> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3cmailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e%3e> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid. Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you. Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Greg Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess). In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”. But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier. Best Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3e> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3e> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments. TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far. "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed. If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c<http://www.lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucernefoods.c> om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/lucernefoods.com%3e%3chttp:/lucernefoods.com>> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucerne.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucerne.com%3e%3chttp:/www.lucerne.com>> was already taken.) Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Greg and all, „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique. Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities? But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code). All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…). Best regards Jorge Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3cmailto:gregs%3cmailto:gregs%3e%3e> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:hatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><http://kom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3chttp://kom>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>><http://admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/admin.ch%3e%3e>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3e> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3cmailto:liz.willia%3cmailto:liz.willia%3e%3e> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3cmailto:ms@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.william%3cmailto:liz.william%3e%3cmailto:liz.william%3cmailto:liz.william%3e%3e> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org><mailto:s@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:s@auda.org.au%3cmailto:s@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org%3e>> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3cmailto>: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3cmailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au%3e%3e%3e%3e>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a<http://www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/www.a> uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au%3e%3chttp:/uda.org.au%3e>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3e> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3e> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmail> to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmai> lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com><http://France.com<http://france.com/>>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>><http://om.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/om.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3e> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><http://min.ch%3e%3chttp:/min.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cma> ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike><mailto:mike<mailto:mike><http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike%3cmailto:mike%3e%3cmailto:mike%3cmailto:mike%3e>> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailt<http://rodenbaugh.com%3e%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailt> o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e>> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>><http://om.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/om.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3e> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><http://min.ch%3e%3chttp:/min.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cma> ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3cmailto:gregshatanip%3e%3e> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3cmailto:c@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3cmailto:gregsh%3cmailto:gregsh%3e%3e> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:atanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gma%3e>> il.com<http://il.com><http://il.com><http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mail<http://il.com%3e%3chttp:/il.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmail> to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan>><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatan%3cmailto:gregshatan%3e%3cmailto:gregshatan%3cmailto:gregshatan%3e%3e> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>><mailto:ipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:ipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:ipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3cmailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmail> to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inte%3e>> r.net<http://r.net><http://r.net><http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i>><http://r.net%3e%3chttp:/r.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.i%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.i%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.i%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.i%3e%3e> nter.net<http://nter.net><http://nter.net><http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll><http://nter.net%3e%3chttp:/nter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll%3cmailto:mmoll%3e%3cmailto:mmoll%3cmailto:mmoll%3e>> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><http://ca.inter.net%3e%3chttp:/ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmai> lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.int%3e>> er.net<http://er.net><http://er.net><http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>><http://er.net%3e%3chttp:/er.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca%3cmailto:mmoll@ca%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca%3cmailto:mmoll@ca%3e%3e>. inter.net<http://inter.net><http://inter.net><http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol><http://inter.net%3e%3chttp:/inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmol%3cmailto:mmol%3e%3cmailto:mmol%3cmailto:mmol%3e>> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>><mailto:l@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:l@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:l@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3cmailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns><mailto:gns<mailto:gns>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gns%3cmailto:gns%3e%3cmailto:gns%3cmailto:gns%3e%3e> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto>: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3e> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e%3cmailto:g%3cmailto:g%3e>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3cmailto:gn%3cmailto:gn%3e%3e> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3cmailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3cmailto:Jorge.Ca%3e>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@%3e%3e> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><http://bakom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak%3e>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>><http://om.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/om.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad%3e%3e> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><http://min.ch%3e%3chttp:/min.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin%3e>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cma> ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mail<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmail> to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo>><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jo%3cmailto:Jo%3e%3cmailto:Jo%3cmailto:Jo%3e%3e> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e%3cmailto:Jorge%3cmailto:Jorge%3e>>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci>><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3cmailto:Jorge.Canci%3e%3e> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:o@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:o@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@b%3e>> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>><http://akom.admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/akom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom%3e%3e>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi><http://admin.ch%3e%3chttp:/admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi%3e>> n.ch<http://n.ch><http://n.ch><http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><http://n.ch%3e%3chttp:/n.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3cmailto:mike@rodenbau%3e%3e> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>><http://gh.com%3e%3chttp:/gh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e%3e> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mail<http://odenbaugh.com%3e%3chttp:/odenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmail> to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co%3e%3e> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3cmailto:mike@rodenb%3e%3e> augh.com<http://augh.com><http://augh.com><http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m><mailto:m<mailto:m><http://augh.com%3e%3chttp:/augh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:m%3cmailto:m%3e%3cmailto:m%3cmailto:m%3e>> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><ma<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cma> ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh%3e>> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e%3cmailto:mike@r%3cmailto:mike@r%3e>> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto<http://odenbaugh.com%3e%3chttp:/odenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto>: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3cmailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e%3e>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3cmailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3e%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3cmailto:Jorg%3cmailto:Jorg%3e%3e> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch%3e%3c>< _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
GDS, Thanks for the insights. The US Constitution, which originally borrowed many insights from foreign and International Law (the Law of Nations, as it was then termed), is and has been for a long while now, quite self-guided and suspicious of foreign sources. More recently, one of the Justices of the US Supreme Court, Stephen Breyer, has been the leading voice of the idea that the Court should not do its job without a careful understanding of foreign law and practice. He has been echoed by other “liberal” judges like Justice Anthony Kennedy, Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The US Supreme Court is divided between those justices who consider foreign law as (at least) an usable, persuasive reference in deciding tough cases, and others who say that citing it “foreign” sources is actually an improper and dangerous way to interpret US Law and the US Constitution. These concerns tend to be politically aligned between Right-leaning judges and politicians (who err on the non-use of “foreign” sources side) and those from the Center to the Left (who are usually not alarmed by this). Some in the Right seem to be concerned that progressive European views (pro-abortion-choice, anti-Death Penalty and perhaps stringent racial-hate-speech limits on 1st amendment doctrine) could warp US jurisprudence; others think openness to foreign law incentivizes the picking and choosing of convenient foreign court decisions to make an otherwise weak point if based on US Law. I think ICANN bylaws are much closer to Breyer’s internationalist views, than to the alternative. Regards, Javier Rúa-Jovet ALAC +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On May 11, 2018, at 8:42 PM, DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr> wrote:
Dear Greg,
Yes, you’re right to point that there are different categories of things and that we should not confuse them. There is local law and international law. There is ICANN and the UN.
Now, those categories being different doesn’t mean they’re not related, or that one could not articulate them. Just as ICANN doesn’t live in autarky, local and international law nourish and cross reference each other. International law is the product of national governments agreeing on common principles, with results ranging from biding treaties to soft law like declarations, recommendations, advice, etc. You’ll see that the courts decisions referenced in this thread (local law) actually have direct and indirect references to international law. Reciprocally, international law is built on concepts derived from national law especially courts decisions that often go much more into details and real life issues. There is ongoing work in UNESCO and WIPO on cultural heritage / geo names and how to protect them. And a national court may very well use those general frameworks to apply them to the domain names system. Think about how in 2014 the European court of justice found in a 1995 directive on privacy the basis for the right to be delisted on search engines (and I can tell you the word “such engine” does not appear in this directive just as the “DNS” doesn’t in some other sources of law...).
So it would be dangerous and, in my opinion, a stretch to completely outline local laws from the discussion. First because local laws, at least so far, have been complied with by ICANN (think GDPR). And second because what an applicant wants above all is legal certainty (again, think GDPR and how much trouble could have been avoided if we tried to incorporate the law in the policy first instead of doing the opposite). So what we don’t want is a policy that would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it challenged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks.
Anyway, let’s try to be open and not think only with binary views and extreme postions.
Best
GDS
________________________________________ De : Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] de la part de Greg Shatan [gregshatanipc@gmail.com] Envoyé : vendredi 11 mai 2018 19:57 À : Robin Gross Cc : gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Objet : [***] Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I agree 100% with Robin.
ICANN is not bound to follow every local law in the world. All law is not “applicable” to ICANN. Echoing Robin, I’m not sure if this is willful or ignorant (or willfully ignorant).... The subtext here is that local law that supports a certain position (or fulfills a certain wish) is “applicable,” but all the rest isn’t. That is not an intellectually sustainable position.
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> wrote: There seems to a massive conflation by some of the term “local law” with the term “international law”. Local law applies locally. If local law applied internationally, it would be called "international law". But it isn’t. It is called local law, because it only applies locally, not internationally. I’m disappointed by the attempts by some govts to pretend like these two entirely different concepts have the same meaning and the same effect globally. It is either ignorance or an attempt to mislead. Either way, it is troubling.
Best, Robin
On May 9, 2018, at 10:35 PM, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Paul
Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows.
Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows.
These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities.
And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws.
Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right.
But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided...
Best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com>> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Jorge,
Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article:
"Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction."
Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech.
Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks!
Best, Paul
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect?
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>> wrote: Jorge,
Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)?
Thanks,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou>> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new>> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><http://kom. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william>> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org>> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike><mailto:mike<mailto:mike>> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma>> il.com<http://il.com><http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan>> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte>> r.net<http://r.net><http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i>> nter.net<http://nter.net><http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll>> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int>> er.net<http://er.net><http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>>. inter.net<http://inter.net><http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol>> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns><mailto:gns<mailto:gns>> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo>> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci>> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b>> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi>> n.ch<http://n.ch><http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>
> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb>> augh.com<http://augh.com><http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m><mailto:m<mailto:m>> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh>> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><<
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear colleagues, I could not agree more with Ghislain. And please lets avoid terms like "ignorance or an attempt to mislead". None of us is ignorant here and none of us has an atemtpt to mislead. National laws must not be ignored. We must be creative and find ways to enhance the rules developed in 2012 to bring clear rules for all parties. We must learn from the conflicts from 2012, which some are still not solved. Lets be creative and find new approaches. And lets be respectful of different views an positions. Best regards Olga 2018-05-11 21:42 GMT-03:00 DE SALINS Ghislain < ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr>:
Dear Greg,
Yes, you’re right to point that there are different categories of things and that we should not confuse them. There is local law and international law. There is ICANN and the UN.
Now, those categories being different doesn’t mean they’re not related, or that one could not articulate them. Just as ICANN doesn’t live in autarky, local and international law nourish and cross reference each other. International law is the product of national governments agreeing on common principles, with results ranging from biding treaties to soft law like declarations, recommendations, advice, etc. You’ll see that the courts decisions referenced in this thread (local law) actually have direct and indirect references to international law. Reciprocally, international law is built on concepts derived from national law especially courts decisions that often go much more into details and real life issues. There is ongoing work in UNESCO and WIPO on cultural heritage / geo names and how to protect them. And a national court may very well use those general frameworks to apply them to the domain names system. Think about how in 2014 the European court of justice found in a 1995 directive on privacy the basis for the right to be delisted on search engines (and I can tell you the word “such engine” does not appear in this directive just as the “DNS” doesn’t in some other sources of law...).
So it would be dangerous and, in my opinion, a stretch to completely outline local laws from the discussion. First because local laws, at least so far, have been complied with by ICANN (think GDPR). And second because what an applicant wants above all is legal certainty (again, think GDPR and how much trouble could have been avoided if we tried to incorporate the law in the policy first instead of doing the opposite). So what we don’t want is a policy that would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it challenged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks.
Anyway, let’s try to be open and not think only with binary views and extreme postions.
Best
GDS
________________________________________ De : Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] de la part de Greg Shatan [gregshatanipc@gmail.com] Envoyé : vendredi 11 mai 2018 19:57 À : Robin Gross Cc : gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Objet : [***] Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I agree 100% with Robin.
ICANN is not bound to follow every local law in the world. All law is not “applicable” to ICANN. Echoing Robin, I’m not sure if this is willful or ignorant (or willfully ignorant).... The subtext here is that local law that supports a certain position (or fulfills a certain wish) is “applicable,” but all the rest isn’t. That is not an intellectually sustainable position.
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:ro bin@ipjustice.org>> wrote: There seems to a massive conflation by some of the term “local law” with the term “international law”. Local law applies locally. If local law applied internationally, it would be called "international law". But it isn’t. It is called local law, because it only applies locally, not internationally. I’m disappointed by the attempts by some govts to pretend like these two entirely different concepts have the same meaning and the same effect globally. It is either ignorance or an attempt to mislead. Either way, it is troubling.
Best, Robin
(Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto: liz.william<mailto:liz.william><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william>> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au<mailto: s@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz. williams@auda.org><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz. williams@auda.org>> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>< mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><; http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike @rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau <mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto: Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:J orge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike @rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau <mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto: Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:J orge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshat anipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip <mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gr egshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshata nipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto: gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com <mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g <mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g <mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto: Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:J orge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>< ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike @rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau <mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike <mailto:mike<mailto:mike>> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto: Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:J orge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>< ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshat anipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip <mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gr egshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshata nipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto: gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com <mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:greg shatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma <mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma>> il.com<http://il.com><http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsh atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gre gshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gre gshatan<mailto:gregshatan><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan>> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com<mailto: ipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail. com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte><mailto: mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte>> r.net<http://r.net><http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto: mmoll@ca.i><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i>> nter.net<http://nter.net><http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll <mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll>> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca. inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int><mailto: mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int>> er.net<http://er.net><http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto: mmoll@ca><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>>. inter.net<http://inter.net><http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll @ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto: mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmol< mailto:mmol><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol>> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net<mailto: l@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>< mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g <mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns><mailto:gns<mailto:gns>> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g <mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g <mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn
so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto: so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto: Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@ bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:J orge.Cancio@>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch
<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>< ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:Jo rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@ bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo>> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorg e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:C ancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci>> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:J orge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b>> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom< mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi><mailto:Jor ge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi>> n.ch<http://n.ch><http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>
> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau <mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r <mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com
<mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb <mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb>> augh.com<http://augh.com><http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mailto:m< mailto:m><mailto:m<mailto:m>> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto: mike@rodenbaugh><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh>> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto: mike@r<mailto:mike@r>> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@ rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><<
On May 9, 2018, at 10:35 PM, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Paul
Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows.
Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows.
These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities.
And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws.
Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right.
But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided...
Best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com>> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Jorge,
Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article:
"Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction."
Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech.
Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks!
Best, Paul
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@ redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>< mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@ redbranchconsulting.com>>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5- bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect?
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshat anipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>> wrote: Jorge,
Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)?
Thanks,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshat anipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso- newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou>> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org<mailto: nces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new>> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld- wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g <mailto:g>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshat anipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregs hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto: gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsha tanipc@gmail.com>>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto: liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto: ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda. org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http:// www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http:// www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><; http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><; http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshat anipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregs hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto: gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto: gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregsha tanipc@gmail.com>>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>< http://kom. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto: liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto: ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda. org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto: Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz. williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto: liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto: ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda. org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au
Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Olga, I wholehearted agree with your comments. Kind regards Annebeth 12. mai 2018 kl. 22:00 skrev Olga Cavalli <olgacavalli@gmail.com<mailto:olgacavalli@gmail.com>>: Dear colleagues, I could not agree more with Ghislain. And please lets avoid terms like "ignorance or an attempt to mislead". None of us is ignorant here and none of us has an atemtpt to mislead. National laws must not be ignored. We must be creative and find ways to enhance the rules developed in 2012 to bring clear rules for all parties. We must learn from the conflicts from 2012, which some are still not solved. Lets be creative and find new approaches. And lets be respectful of different views an positions. Best regards Olga 2018-05-11 21:42 GMT-03:00 DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr<mailto:ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr>>: Dear Greg, Yes, you’re right to point that there are different categories of things and that we should not confuse them. There is local law and international law. There is ICANN and the UN. Now, those categories being different doesn’t mean they’re not related, or that one could not articulate them. Just as ICANN doesn’t live in autarky, local and international law nourish and cross reference each other. International law is the product of national governments agreeing on common principles, with results ranging from biding treaties to soft law like declarations, recommendations, advice, etc. You’ll see that the courts decisions referenced in this thread (local law) actually have direct and indirect references to international law. Reciprocally, international law is built on concepts derived from national law especially courts decisions that often go much more into details and real life issues. There is ongoing work in UNESCO and WIPO on cultural heritage / geo names and how to protect them. And a national court may very well use those general frameworks to apply them to the domain names system. Think about how in 2014 the European court of justice found in a 1995 directive on privacy the basis for the right to be delisted on search engines (and I can tell you the word “such engine” does not appear in this directive just as the “DNS” doesn’t in some other sources of law...). So it would be dangerous and, in my opinion, a stretch to completely outline local laws from the discussion. First because local laws, at least so far, have been complied with by ICANN (think GDPR). And second because what an applicant wants above all is legal certainty (again, think GDPR and how much trouble could have been avoided if we tried to incorporate the law in the policy first instead of doing the opposite). So what we don’t want is a policy that would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it challenged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks. Anyway, let’s try to be open and not think only with binary views and extreme postions. Best GDS ________________________________________ De : Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] de la part de Greg Shatan [gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>] Envoyé : vendredi 11 mai 2018 19:57 À : Robin Gross Cc : gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Objet : [***] Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I agree 100% with Robin. ICANN is not bound to follow every local law in the world. All law is not “applicable” to ICANN. Echoing Robin, I’m not sure if this is willful or ignorant (or willfully ignorant).... The subtext here is that local law that supports a certain position (or fulfills a certain wish) is “applicable,” but all the rest isn’t. That is not an intellectually sustainable position. Best regards, Greg On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org><mailto:robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>>> wrote: There seems to a massive conflation by some of the term “local law” with the term “international law”. Local law applies locally. If local law applied internationally, it would be called "international law". But it isn’t. It is called local law, because it only applies locally, not internationally. I’m disappointed by the attempts by some govts to pretend like these two entirely different concepts have the same meaning and the same effect globally. It is either ignorance or an attempt to mislead. Either way, it is troubling. Best, Robin
On May 9, 2018, at 10:35 PM, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote:
Dear Paul
Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows.
Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows.
These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities.
And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws.
Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right.
But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided...
Best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com><mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com>>> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>>> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Jorge,
Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article:
"Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by the nature of the infringement, for satisfaction."
Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech.
Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks!
Best, Paul
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>>>> wrote: I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please? Paul
Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
-----Original Message----- From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hi Greg Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking. Have a nice weekend best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect?
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>> wrote: Jorge,
Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you do)?
Thanks,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Greg Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is qualitatively different. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ An: alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Alexander,
You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot. The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.
When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically, the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither should Luzern.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>> wrote: Greg,
Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “LUCERNE”! The trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods and services trade-marked).
And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are merely representing them.
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou>>> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>><mailto:nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new>>> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>>> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.
Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich, Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Greg
Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific categories of products and services (food related I guess).
In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on its name pursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.
But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.
Best
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>>> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>
Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.
TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.
"Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is being exercised or infringed.
If Lucerne Foods (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from Luzern. (I assume they have lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com> because www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com> was already taken.)
Best regards,
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Greg and all,
„Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city name – TLDs are unique.
Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai” delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?
But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for, intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our country (based on Art. 29 civil code).
All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>>> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><http://kom. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>> Cc: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william>>> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au>><mailto:s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org>>> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>>> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>>> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%25253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%25253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com><http://France.com>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>>> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%25253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>< mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike><mailto:mike<mailto:mike>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike><mailto:mike<mailto:mike>>> @rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com><http://rodenbaugh.com><http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailt o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%25253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>>> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>>> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%25253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>>> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>< mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>>> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma>>> il.com<http://il.com><http://il.com><http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mail to:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%25253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan>>> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com>><mailto:ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mail to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%25253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte>>> r.net<http://r.net><http://r.net><http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i>><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i>>> nter.net<http://nter.net><http://nter.net><http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll>>> @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mai lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%25253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>
<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int>>> er.net<http://er.net><http://er.net><http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>>>. inter.net<http://inter.net><http://inter.net><http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol>>> l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net>><mailto:l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns><mailto:gns<mailto:gns>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns><mailto:gns<mailto:gns>>> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>><mailto: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>>> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>>. ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><ma ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%25253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mail to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%25253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo>><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo>>> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>>>. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci>><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci>>> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b>>> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>>>. admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi>>> n.ch<http://n.ch><http://n.ch><http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>
wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>>> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mail to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%25253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>>> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb>><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb>>> augh.com<http://augh.com><http://augh.com><http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m><mailto:m<mailto:m>><mailto:m<mailto:m><mailto:m<mailto:m>>> ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><ma ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%25253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh>>> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>>> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto: mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><<
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
+1Thanks,Harish Chowdhary,Technology Analyst,National Internet Exchange of IndiaISOC FELLOW | inSIG FELLOWIIREF FELLOW | UASG AMBASSADORwww.nixi.in | www.indiaig.in | registry.inFrom: Olga Cavalli <olgacavalli@gmail.com>Sent: Sun, 13 May 2018 01:30:42 GMT+0530To: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [***] Conference call: city names Dear colleagues, I could not agree more with Ghislain. And please lets avoid terms like "ignorance or an attempt to mislead". None of us is ignorant here and none of us has an atemtpt to mislead. National laws must not be ignored. We must be creative and find ways to enhance the rules developed in 2012 to bring clear rules for all parties. We must learn from the conflicts from 2012, which some are still not solved. Lets be creative and find new approaches. And lets be respectful of different views an positions. Best regards Olga 2018-05-11 21:42 GMT-03:00 DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins@finances.gouv.fr>: Dear Greg,Yes, you’re right to point that there are different categories of things and that we should not confuse them. There is local law and international law. There is ICANN and the UN.Now, those categories being different doesn’t mean they’re not related, or that one could not articulate them. Just as ICANN doesn’t live in autarky, local and international law nourish and cross reference each other. International law is the product of national governments agreeing on common principles, with results ranging from biding treaties to soft law like declarations, recommendations, advice, etc. You’ll see that the courts decisions referenced in this thread (local law) actually have direct and indirect references to international law. Reciprocally, international law is built on concepts derived from national law especially courts decisions that often go much more into details and real life issues. There is ongoing work in UNESCO and WIPO on cultural heri tage / geo names and how to protect them. And a national court may very well use those general frameworks to apply them to the domain names system. Think about how in 2014 the European court of justice found in a 1995 directive on privacy the basis for the right to be delisted on search engines (and I can tell you the word “such engine” does not appear in this directive just as the “DNS” doesn’t in some other sources of law...).So it would be dangerous and, in my opinion, a stretch to completely outline local laws from the discussion. First because local laws, at least so far, have been complied with by ICANN (think GDPR). And second because what an applicant wants above all is legal certainty (again, think GDPR and how much trouble could have been avoided if we tried to incorporate the law in the policy first instead of doing the opposite). So what we don’t want is a policy that would allow an applicant to go for a top level and then see it chall enged in courts because we, in this work track, refused to carefully analyse existing local and international sources of law. For the same reason, a letter of non objection is very valuable. It’s not only a balanced solution between reservation and open registration / delegation ; it also shields in some ways the applicant from legal risks.Anyway, let’s try to be open and not think only with binary views and extreme postions.BestGDS ________________________________________De : Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] de la part de Greg Shatan [gregshatanipc@gmail.com]Envoyé : vendredi 11 mai 2018 19:57À : Robin GrossCc : gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.orgObjet : [***] Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city namesI agree 100% with Robin.ICANN is not bound to follow every local law in the world. All law is not “applicable” to ICANN. Echoing Robin, I’m not sure if this is willful or ignorant (or willfull y ignorant).... The subtext here is that local law that supports a certain position (or fulfills a certain wish) is “applicable,” but all the rest isn’t. That is not an intellectually sustainable position.Best regards,GregOn Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> wrote:There seems to a massive conflation by some of the term “local law” with the term “international law”. Local law applies locally. If local law applied internationally, it would be called "international law". But it isn’t. It is called local law, because it only applies locally, not internationally. I’m disappointed by the attempts by some govts to pretend like these two entirely different concepts have the same meaning and the same effect globally. It is either ignorance or an attempt to mislead. Either way, it is troubling.Best,Robin> On May 9, 2018, at 10:35 PM, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:>> Dear Paul>> Under that article public authorities such as cities have the right to protect their name in general, also in the DNS, as the case-law shows.>> Similar laws exist in other countries and are also applicable to the DNS, as case-law shows.>> These laws reflect amongst other things the public interest of public authorities in their denominations and the identity of their communities.>> And please don‘t forget that the DNS is global, a TLD is unique, its delegation has effects everywhere, and local law if applicable needs to be respected by ICANN pursuant its bylaws.>> Besides that I guess you are aware that in case of persisting infringement of any right, anyone entitled to a right (eg a brand owner or a city government on its name) has to go to court to enforce that right.>> But I guess we may both agree that that would be a bad idea in the DNS, and that policy solutions like UDRP are preferable - policy solutions where rights and interests are considered from the start, everyone is brought to a table and protracted conflicts are avoided...>> Best regards>> Jorge>>>> ________________________________>> Von: Paul McGrady <mcgradygnso@gmail.com<mailto:mcgradygnso@gmail.com>>> Datum: 9. Mai 2018 um 23:54:13 MESZ> An: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>>> Cc: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>) <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names>> Hi Jorge,>> Following up on our conversation today on the WG call, I took a look at Article 29 of the Swiss Civil Code as you suggested. I don't see anything in here about a government's right to block delegation of top level domain names. In fact, there is no mention of top level domain names at all nor any mention of any preemptive rights at all. It does provide a mechanism to deal with name disputes, but those are in the purview of the courts, not in the purview of prior restraints on speech. Here is the language of the Article:>> "Art. 29 1 If a person’s use of his or her name is disputed, he or she may apply for a court declaration confirming his rights. 2 If a person is adversely affected because another person is using his or her name, he or she may seek an order prohibiting such use and, if the user is at fault, may bring a claim for damages and, where justified by th e nature of the infringement, for satisfaction.">> Is there another Article 29 to which you are referring? Absent that, I don't think this supports the position you are advancing. Under Article 29 if someone was upset about a top level domain name, they could, in theory, go to courts, but nothing in here allows for preemptive blocking of speech.>> Also, is there any other basis whatsoever under international or national law, other than what appears to be an inapplicable Swiss Code section, to support the notion that governments have a right to pre-censor the top level? If so, now is the time to produce citations so that we can all read them. Thanks!>> Best,> Paul>>>>> On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com><mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>&g t;> wrote:> I didn't see those Jorge. Could you resend please?> Paul>> Paul Rosenzweig> M: +1 (202) 329-9650> VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739>>> -----Original Message-----> From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> On Behalf> Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:24 PM> To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg- wt5] Conference call: city names>> Hi Greg> Please see my responses to Paul and Robin, where I explain my thinking.> Have a nice weekend> best> Jorge>>>> ________________________________>> Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>> Datum: 5. Mai 2018 um 19:31:39 MESZ> An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>,> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-w t5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names>> Also, why do you think that right should have any extraterritorial effect?>> On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM Greg Shatan> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>> wrote:> Jorge,>> Can you expand on that, please? Why do you think it’s different, in ways> that are relevant here? And why do you think it’s superior (assuming you> do)?>> Thanks,>> Greg>> On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote:> Dear Greg> Luzern has a right on the name as such under civil right, which is> qualitatively different.> Best> Jorge>>>> ________________________________>> Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 16:44:19 MESZ> An: alexander@schubert.berlin <alexander@schubert.berlin>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann. org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names> > Alexander,>> You seem to be confusing how patents work and how trademarks work. Patents> can accurately be characterized as a “right to exclude.” Trademarks cannot.> The company has positive rights in LUCERNE.>> When enforcing that trademark, the owners of LUCERNE can seek to stop use or> registration of a mark that raises a “likelihood of confusion” — basically,> the same or similar mark for the same or related goods and services, and for> goods and services in the “natural zone of expansion.” I’m not saying they> have the right to stop EVERYBODY nor should they, but then again, neither> should Luzern.>> Greg>> On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:31 AM Alexander Schubert> <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote:> Greg,>> Lucerne Foods, Inc. (an American legal entity) might have acquired trade> mark rights in the United States of America – but NOT for “ LUCERNE”! The> trade mark protection prevents the commercial usage of the trade-marked> string “lucerne” - FOR A VERY NARROW SELECTION OF SERVICES AND GOODS. It’s> rather the services and goods that you protect – FOR a certain string. The> string itself is free to use by anybody for everything (minus the few goods> and services trade-marked).>> And nobody says that “governments think the rights of governments come> first” – it is THE PEOPLE who come first of course – and Governments are> merely representing them.>> Alexander>>>>>> From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5> [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou<mailto:g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bou>>> nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org><mailto:nces@icann.org<mailto:nces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new><mailto:gnso-new<mailto:gnso-new>>> gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:08 AM> To:> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>>> .Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc:> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ica nn.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names>> Of course Lucerne Foods has a right on Lucerne. More precisely, they have> legitimate interests in and a legal right to Lucerne. And they have> trademark registrations for LUCERNE. As with any registration they specify> goods and services. That doesn’t make their rights less valid.>> Can you clarify if you believe that the hypothetical applicant for .sandwich> should be required to get letters of support or nonobjective from Sandwich,> Mass and Sandwich, England? Thank you.>> Greg>> On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:43 AM> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi n.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote:> Dear Greg>> Thanks for your reply. “Lucerne Foods” has no right on “Lucerne” – it most> probably just has a trademark for “lucerne foods” in very specific> categories of products and services (food related I guess).>> In Switzerland (“Lucerne” as such) would in fact be barred from registration> as a business name (as I have said). And the city of Lucerne has a right on> its name p ursuant 29 Civil Code, so it has clearly a good legal ground to> challenge the delegation of the unique resource “.lucerne”.>> But beyond the Swiss legal system, the delegation of the unique resource> which is a city’s name will give rise to political sensitivities, whatever> the “intended use”. You need that city government on board. Otherwise you> will have a political problem – which is quite natural as city governments> have responsibilities, and the name of their city is their main identifier.>> Best>> Jorge>> Von: Greg Shatan> [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>>> ha tanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>]> Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:36> An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.adm in.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>> Cc: Liz Williams> <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names>> Uniqueness does not convey primacy upon governments.>> TLDs may be unique, but that does not mean that governments should get a> "Trump Card" to block any use of a string with (among other things) a> geographic meaning. I can understand why governments think the rights of> governments come first, but that's not going to get us very far.>> "Use" is absolutely important -- it goes to whether a legitimate right is> being exercised or infringed.>> If Lucerne Foods> (www.lucernefoods.com<http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.com><http://www.lucernefoods.c>; om>), one of the world's largest food producers, wants to apply for> .lucerne, they should have the right to do so, without interference from> Luzern. (I assume they have> lucernefoods.com<http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com><http://lucernefoods.com>; because> www.lucerne.com<http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com><http://www.lucerne.com>; was already> taken.)>> Best regards,>> Greg>> On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:23 AM,> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin .ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> > e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote:> Dear Greg and all,>> „Sandwich“ may be a nice example, but fact is that, as I explained, the> “use” is not really important, as we only have one string with that city> name – TLDs are unique.>> Therefore, whatever the intended use (a can of worms on its own btw), the> unique TLD with the “city name” would be delegated. Think on “.shanghai”> delegated for a “non geo-use”. Who would say that would have no> implications, that would not arise no political sensitivities?>> But getting back to my country, if “.luzern” were to be applied for,> intending a “non-geo use”, I would very well understand that this would> bring about not only political issues but also legal challenges in our> country (based on Art. 29 civil code).>> All this is avoided if you acknowledge the facts (TLDs are unique and> political sensitivities are there) and try to put everyone at the table. The> non-objection letter does that. It may be improved, based on factual issues> detected in the 2012 round – btw: we should of course consult all parties in> those issues and get first-hand information from the applicants and public> authorities involved – just basing our analysis on hearsay, opinions or> third-party reports would not be appropriate (Greg, you will remember that> in the “jurisdiction Subgroup” of the CCWG Accountability we followed the> same path of only looking at first hand evidence…).>> Best regards>> Jorge>> Von: Greg Shatan> [mailto:gregshatanipc@g mail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs><mailto:gregs<mailto:gregs>>> hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:hatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>]> Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:07> An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Can cio@bakom.admin.ch>>><http://kom.>; admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>>>; Cc: Liz Williams> <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>; Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ;><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names>> The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all)> only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for> string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no> opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is> another applicant, that' ;s an entirely different situation that I am not> covering in this email.)>> Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for> sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich> historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads,> condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens,> etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich)> should have no say in the matter.>> This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for> .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta> Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not> to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a> practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with> geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo&g t; TLD".>> Greg>> On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM,> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>> > e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote:> Dear Liz>> The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who> has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.>> The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland),> whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which> is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be> monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult> for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that> their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they> did not „object“.>& gt; To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should> not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant> that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated> character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule,> which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and> addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure> completely upside-down.>> More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities,> which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the> corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and> non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues> only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.>> best regards>> Jorge>>>> ________________________________>> Von: Liz Williams& gt; <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia><mailto:liz.willia<mailto:liz.willia>>> ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au><mailto:ms@auda.org.au<mailto:ms@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ> An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt 5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> > Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names>> Hello everyone>> This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a> simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is> backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should> not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it> continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.>> I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about> also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something.> I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for> reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is> still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want> something to happen. Here are t he steps.>> 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to> do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place.> We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.>> 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change> your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3.> (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).>> 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you> are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic> law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the> application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should> be referred to which causes such trouble.>> The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an> application which addresses those poi nts and avoids an objection (all> applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use> those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within> appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account> in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their> objection may be discarded by evaluators.>> Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions> and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an> application process.>> I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to> a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy> recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria,> assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points> above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.>> Liz> >> ….> Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs> .au Domain Administration Ltd> M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757> E:> liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william><mailto:liz.william<mailto:liz.william>>> s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au><mailto:s@auda.org.au<mailto:s@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org>>> .au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<ma ilto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:> liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.auda.org.au><http://www.a>; uda.org.au<http://uda.org.au><http://uda.org.au>>>>; Important Notice> This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to> legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If> you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any> part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, ple ase> notify the sender and delete this message immediately.>> On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh> <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mik e@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>> wrote:>> Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We> should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications> from the last round.>> Mike Rodenbaugh> RODENBAUGH LAW> tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087> http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>>>; On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM,> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mai lto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Can cio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>> wrote:> Dear Mike> There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it> up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess> the court decisions will be in German and French.> Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as> such as trademarks or business names are also common...> On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific> categories of products and services...> In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single> string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount.> Best> Jorge>>>> ________________________________>> Von: Mike Rodenbaugh> <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@ro denbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>>; Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ> An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>>; Cc: Gregory S. Shatan> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>>> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>& gt;<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>>> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>,> mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca .inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail> to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<m ailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai> lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>,> g nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann. org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-n ewgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> ;>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names>> I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to> domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug> into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re> France.com<http://France.com>.>>; Mike Rodenbaugh> RODENBAUGH LAW> tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087> http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>>>; On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM,> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch& gt;<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>< ;mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>>> om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>>>; min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>.>; ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch& lt;mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma> ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>> wrote:> Dear Mike> I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their> names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the> registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city> names.> best> Jorge>>>> ________________________________>> Von: Mike Rodenbaugh> <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh .com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike<mailto:mike><mailto:mike<mailto:mike>>>; @rodenbaugh.com<http: //rodenbaugh.com><http://rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailt>; o:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:o%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:o%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>>> m><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaug h.com>>>>>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ> An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<m ailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@>>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>>>; om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>>> min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>.>; ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma> ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>>> Cc : Gregory S. Shatan> <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip><mailto:gregshatanip<mailto:gregshatanip>>> c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com><mailto:c@gmail.com<mailto:c@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatan ipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh><mailto:gregsh<mailto:gregsh>>> atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com><mailto:atanipc@gmail.com<mailto:atanipc@gmail.com>>>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma><mailto:gregshatanipc@gma<mailto:gregshatanipc@gma>>> il.com<http://il.com><http://il.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>><mail>; to:gregshatani pc@gmail.com<mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:to%3Agregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:to%253Agregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan><mailto:gregshatan<mailto:gregshatan>>> ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com><mailto:ipc@gmail.com<mailto:ipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>>>,> mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca .inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mail> to:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:to%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:to%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte><mailto:mmoll@ca.inte<mailto:mmoll@ca.inte>>> r.net<http://r.net><http://r.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto :mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i><mailto:mmoll@ca.i<mailto:mmoll@ca.i>>> nter.net<http://nter.net><http://nter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll><mailto:mmoll<mailto:mmoll>>>; @ca.inter.net<http://ca.inter.net><http://ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>>; <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>& gt;<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mai> lto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:lto%3Ammoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:lto%253Ammoll@ca.inter.net>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ ca.int><mailto:mmoll@ca.int<mailto:mmoll@ca.int>>> er.net<http://er.net><http://er.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca><mailto:mmoll@ca<mailto:mmoll@ca>>.>; inter.net<http://inter.net><http://inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol><mailto:mmol<mailto:mmol>>>; l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net><mailto:l@ca.inter.net<mailto:l@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.int er.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>>>>,> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@ican n.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gns o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>>> so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gns<mailto:gns><mailto:gns<mailto:gns>>> o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld -wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:o-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>< ;mailto:> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>><mailto:> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld- wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:g<mailto:g><mailto:g<mailto:g>>> nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:nso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gn<mailto:gn><mailto:gn<mailto:gn>>> so-newgtld-wg-wt 5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:so-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names>> Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to> geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager> to be enlightened if they exist.>> Thanks,> Mike>> Mike Rodenbaugh> RODENBAUGH LAW> tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087> http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>>>; On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM,> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< ;mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca><mailto:Jorge.Ca<mailto:Jorge.Ca>>> ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ncio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@&g t;>> bakom.admin.ch<http://bakom.admin.ch><http://bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bak>>>; om.admin.ch<http://om.admin.ch><http://om.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.ad>>>; min.ch<http://min.ch><http://min.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge. Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin>>.> ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><ma> ilto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:ilto%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ilto%253AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mail> to:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:to%3AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:to%253 AJorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo><mailto:Jo<mailto:Jo>>> rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:rge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge><mailto:Jorge<mailto:Jorge>>.> Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Canci<ma ilto:Jorge.Canci><mailto:Jorge.Canci<mailto:Jorge.Canci>>> o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:o@bakom.admin.ch>>>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@b>>> akom.admin.ch<http://akom.admin.ch><http://akom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom>>.>; admin.ch<http://admin.ch><http://admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><m ailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi>>> n.ch<http://n.ch><http://n.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>>>>>>; wrote:> Dear Mike>> Thanks for your input.>> In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one> single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for> clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city> names – this is reflected in law.>> Best regards> ;> Jorge>>> Von: Mike Rodenbaugh> [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau><mailto:mike@rodenbau<mailto:mike@rodenbau>>> gh.com<http://gh.com><http://gh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>>>; odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.c om<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mail> to:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:to%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:to%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.co>>> m<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb><mailto:mike@rodenb<mailto:mike@rodenb>>> augh.com< http://augh.com><http://augh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>><mailto:m<mailto:m><mailto:m<mailto:m>>>; ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><ma> ilto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:ilto%3Amike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:ilto%253Amike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenba ugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh>>> .com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r><mailto:mike@r<mailto:mike@r>>> odenbaugh.com<http://odenbaugh.com><http://odenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:>; mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenb augh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>>>>]> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49> An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admi n.ch>>><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg><mailto:Jorg<mailto:Jorg>>> e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:e.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><<_______________________________________________Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing listGnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5___________________... mailing listGnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [NIXI is on Social-Media too. Kindly follow us at: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/nixiindia & Twitter: @inregistry ] This e-mail is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies and the original message. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited and appropriate legal action will be taken. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 3, 2018, at 10:06 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application.
I think Greg’s suggestion to focus on intended use is a very helpful suggestion for our work. It allows us to focus on whether or not someone is trying to misrepresent that they speak for a govt when they don’t, and I think that misrepresentation should be key in our analysis. We don’t want to encourage a misrepresentation, but we also are obligated to recognize competing legitimate interests to the same term and in cases where there is no misrepresentation connected with the intended use of TLD with geographic meaning, those applicants should be allowed to go forward, unless they violate international law on some other ground. Thanks, Robin
On May 3, 2018, at 10:06 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com/ <http://rodenbaugh.com/>>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://France.com <http://france.com/>>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com/ <http://rodenbaugh.com/>>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com/ <http://rodenbaugh.com/>>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com <http://city.com/><http://city.com/ <http://city.com/>><http://city.com <http://city.com/><http://city.com/ <http://city.com/>>><http://city.com <http://city.com/><http://city.com/ <http://city.com/>>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com/ <http://rodenbaugh.com/>>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au/ <http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au/ <http://www.auda.org.au/>>><http://www.auda.org.au/ <http://www.auda.org.au/>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Robin, I think you and I share a certain “distain” for regulation exercised through “Governments”. You write: “It allows us to focus on whether or not someone is trying to misrepresent that they speak for a govt when they don’t, and I think that misrepresentation should be key in our analysis.” You and Greg are seemingly working off the assumption that somebody wants to help GOVERNMENTS to “protect” their territories in the DNS. But why don’t you and Greg ever think about THE PEOPLE? I honestly couldn’t care less about Governments – but I do care very much and very passionate about PEOPLE. And we need to make sure that the constituents of a city are looped into the decision what happens to their city name in the DNS. In the 2012 AGB this was facilitated by CITY Governments (NOT national Governments). Forget for a moment about “Governments” – and root for THE PEOPLE: How to protect THEM? NOT from “misrepresentation” – but from the ability to identify themselves through city gTLD domain names (see the equivalent via ccTLDs). Hence my proposal to REQUIRE a “community priority application” if the string is identical to a (“sizeable”) city: I want that THE PEOPLE in a city are INVOLVED. Not enough to just go to the major, promise 85% of (diluted) “profits” – and then blanket the space with hundreds of non-managed city gTLDs applied for to “just make big bucks”; instead of having locally managed and promoted CITY initiatives that THRIVE! Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Robin Gross Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 7:20 PM To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names On May 3, 2018, at 10:06 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> > wrote: The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. I think Greg’s suggestion to focus on intended use is a very helpful suggestion for our work. It allows us to focus on whether or not someone is trying to misrepresent that they speak for a govt when they don’t, and I think that misrepresentation should be key in our analysis. We don’t want to encourage a misrepresentation, but we also are obligated to recognize competing legitimate interests to the same term and in cases where there is no misrepresentation connected with the intended use of TLD with geographic meaning, those applicants should be allowed to go forward, unless they violate international law on some other ground. Thanks, Robin On May 3, 2018, at 10:06 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> > wrote: The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> > wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> > Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> > Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> > www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/> <http://www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/> > Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> >> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/> <http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> >> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> >>, mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> > <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> > <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com <http://france.com> <http://France.com <http://france.com/> >. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/> <http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> ><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> ><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> >>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> ><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> ><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> >>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >> <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/> <http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> ><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> ><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> ><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> >><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> ><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> >>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> ><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> ><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> ><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> >><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> ><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> >>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com <http://city.com/> <http://city.com/><http://city.com <http://city.com/> <http://city.com/>><http://city.com <http://city.com/> <http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/> <http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> ><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> ><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> >><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> >>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> >>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> >>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> >>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> >><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> ><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> >>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> >>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> ><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> >>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> ><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> >>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> ><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> >><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> ><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> >>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> ><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> >><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> ><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> >>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> ><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> >><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> ><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> >>> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/> <http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/> <http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> ><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
I want to thank Alexander for so ably expressing a view that I can really resonate with. Cities are as unique and culturally relevant as countries -- many of them have been around longer than the countries they now reside in (Istanbul). Would it be possible to create a list of cities that are large enough that their names should be treated as reserved for the use of the people of that city to identify themselves just as countries do through ccTLD's? Could we set the conditions that would lead to such a list? Inevitably, some cities would be excluded and seek inclusion. But we have to start somewhere. Marita Moll On 5/5/2018 1:41 PM, Alexander Schubert wrote:
Robin,
I think you and I share a certain “distain” for regulation exercised through “Governments”. You write:
*/“It allows us to focus on whether or not someone is trying to misrepresent that they speak for a govt when they don’t, and I think that misrepresentation should be key in our analysis.”/*
You and Greg are seemingly working off the assumption that somebody wants to help GOVERNMENTS to “protect” their territories in the DNS. But why don’t you and Greg ever think about THE PEOPLE? I honestly couldn’t care less about Governments – but I do care very much and very passionate about PEOPLE. And we need to make sure that the constituents of a city are looped into the decision what happens to their city name in the DNS. In the 2012 AGB this was facilitated by CITY Governments (NOT national Governments). Forget for a moment about “Governments” – and root for THE PEOPLE: How to protect THEM? NOT from “misrepresentation” – but from the ability to identify themselves through city gTLD domain names (see the equivalent via ccTLDs).
Hence my proposal to REQUIRE a “community priority application” if the string is identical to a (“sizeable”) city: I want that THE PEOPLE in a city are INVOLVED. Not enough to just go to the major, promise 85% of (diluted) “profits” – and then blanket the space with hundreds of non-managed city gTLDs applied for to “just make big bucks”; instead of having locally managed and promoted CITY initiatives that THRIVE!
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
*From:*Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Robin Gross *Sent:* Friday, May 04, 2018 7:20 PM *To:* Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> *Cc:* Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
On May 3, 2018, at 10:06 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> wrote:
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application.
I think Greg’s suggestion to focus on intended use is a very helpful suggestion for our work. It allows us to focus on whether or not someone is trying to misrepresent that they speak for a govt when they don’t, and I think that misrepresentation should be key in our analysis. We don’t want to encourage a misrepresentation, but we also are obligated to recognize competing legitimate interests to the same term and in cases where there is no misrepresentation connected with the intended use of TLD with geographic meaning, those applicants should be allowed to go forward, unless they violate international law on some other ground.
Thanks,
Robin
On May 3, 2018, at 10:06 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> wrote:
The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.)
Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter.
This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD".
Greg
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote:
Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“.
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/>>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com <http://france.com><http://France.com <http://france.com/>>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com <http://city.com/><http://city.com/><http://city.com <http://city.com/><http://city.com/>><http://city.com <http://city.com/><http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Hello everyone I am really pleased that this thread has yielded such a diverse set of perspectives. I wanted to, if we could, try to wrap up some things that we may or may not have consensus on so that we can discuss that on the next call. That might help the co-chairs and staff? 1. We want to continue to have clear, objective and fact based policies associated with the assessment of all TLD applications. This, of course, includes geographic terms. 2. We need to have clear application evaluation procedures that ensure that the ICANN Board, GAC, applicants understand exactly what their respective roles are. In a multi-stakeholder environment, no one has primacy over another. The GAC is very different from national governments and can only provide collective consensus advice to the ICANN Board. The GAC has no operational role. However, individual member governments may have different opinions about specific applications for TLDs. These two things are no different from what we had hoped would happen in previous rounds. Where we have diverged is that the role of the Board and GAC and the ICANN organisation dramatically changed the implementation of the evaluation process for many applicants. Interference in the evaluation process was problematic and unfair as has been demonstrated in numerous examples. We need to address that unfairness in implementation suggestions. For the next round, I would suggest that we, at a policy level, do not change 1 above. However, we should have plenty to say on the implementation of those policies because, given the level of disagreement/misunderstanding/positioning, we are not in agreement. From listening to the discussion I think we have general consensus that 1. Geographic terms are important for the next round of applications for many reasons which are consistent with ICANN’s Mission and Core Values. 2. That the expansion of “lists” of things is not an effective or useful or reliable way of determining what could be in or out beyond ISO 3166. Expansion of the application of national law into the international realm of the domain name system is neither effective or appropriate. We already have in place numerous elements which can be relied upon by applications and evaluators to fairly and predictably “treat” applications for TLD labels that may have geographic significance. 3. We agree that governments may be concerned with geographic terms but they do not own them or control or have a right of veto over an application. Governments are legitimate applicants for geographic terms. They are also legitimate objectors, like any one else, to applications. Looking forward to hearing other views but I hope that we, finally, get rid of the “non-objection” artifact which can be capricious (if a government changes), subjective (because we haven’t successfully articulated what non-objection looks like on a consistent basis), and it is much easier to either support something or object to it (using clearly set out guidelines). Best wishes. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 7 May 2018, at 9:24 am, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> wrote: I want to thank Alexander for so ably expressing a view that I can really resonate with. Cities are as unique and culturally relevant as countries -- many of them have been around longer than the countries they now reside in (Istanbul). Would it be possible to create a list of cities that are large enough that their names should be treated as reserved for the use of the people of that city to identify themselves just as countries do through ccTLD's? Could we set the conditions that would lead to such a list? Inevitably, some cities would be excluded and seek inclusion. But we have to start somewhere. Marita Moll On 5/5/2018 1:41 PM, Alexander Schubert wrote: Robin, I think you and I share a certain “distain” for regulation exercised through “Governments”. You write: “It allows us to focus on whether or not someone is trying to misrepresent that they speak for a govt when they don’t, and I think that misrepresentation should be key in our analysis.” You and Greg are seemingly working off the assumption that somebody wants to help GOVERNMENTS to “protect” their territories in the DNS. But why don’t you and Greg ever think about THE PEOPLE? I honestly couldn’t care less about Governments – but I do care very much and very passionate about PEOPLE. And we need to make sure that the constituents of a city are looped into the decision what happens to their city name in the DNS. In the 2012 AGB this was facilitated by CITY Governments (NOT national Governments). Forget for a moment about “Governments” – and root for THE PEOPLE: How to protect THEM? NOT from “misrepresentation” – but from the ability to identify themselves through city gTLD domain names (see the equivalent via ccTLDs). Hence my proposal to REQUIRE a “community priority application” if the string is identical to a (“sizeable”) city: I want that THE PEOPLE in a city are INVOLVED. Not enough to just go to the major, promise 85% of (diluted) “profits” – and then blanket the space with hundreds of non-managed city gTLDs applied for to “just make big bucks”; instead of having locally managed and promoted CITY initiatives that THRIVE! Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Robin Gross Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 7:20 PM To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names On May 3, 2018, at 10:06 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> wrote: The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. I think Greg’s suggestion to focus on intended use is a very helpful suggestion for our work. It allows us to focus on whether or not someone is trying to misrepresent that they speak for a govt when they don’t, and I think that misrepresentation should be key in our analysis. We don’t want to encourage a misrepresentation, but we also are obligated to recognize competing legitimate interests to the same term and in cases where there is no misrepresentation connected with the intended use of TLD with geographic meaning, those applicants should be allowed to go forward, unless they violate international law on some other ground. Thanks, Robin On May 3, 2018, at 10:06 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> wrote: The burden of non-objection is "fairly" put on the applicant (if at all) only if the intended use of the gTLD is as a "geo TLD." If the applied-for string is going to be used for other purposes, there should be no opportunity for a non-applicant to block an application. (If the "place" is another applicant, that's an entirely different situation that I am not covering in this email.) Consider an application for .sandwich as a gTLD geared toward domains for sandwich restaurants, sandwich recipe sites, sandwich fans, sandwich historians, sellers of sandwich ingredients (meats, cheeses, breads, condiments, etc.) or sandwich implements (panini presses, toaster ovens, etc.). Sandwich, England and Sandwich, Mass. (and the Earl of Sandwich) should have no say in the matter. This is analogous to the treatment of brands. If Delta Faucets applies for .Delta, Delta Van Lines has no basis for an objection -- because Delta Faucets has a legitimate right. Delta Van Lines option is to apply or not to apply (even if it is only a "defensive application"). This is a practical and time-tested model that we should use for strings with geographic and other meanings, at least where the gTLDs use is not as a "geo TLD". Greg On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:56 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://france.com/><http://France.com<http://france.com/>>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>,gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>;gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com/><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/><http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/><http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Hello Jorge My suggestion about removing the very difficult “non-objection” process has, I hope, been improved by the clarity I wrote out before but perhaps not? Essentially it creates a level playing field for all objections which most certainly does not “gerrymander” governments out. It is, in fact, the reverse. With clearly spelt out processes where all objectors are created equal and have to meet the same obligations for their objections means that all objections are treated fairly. That is directly aligned with ICANN’s Mission and Core Values. That is also the centre of Mike Rodenbaugh’s strenuous comments where a few governments objected to some terms which is dramatically different to there being consensus GAC Advice which is presented to the ICANN board for its consideration. We shouldn’t conflate the two. And your continued insistent to provide “evidence or facts” is sometimes not possible when one is trying to float new ideas or turn ideas around or come up with better ways of doing things. We can sometimes rely on history to give us facts but we are also looking forward to make improvements and not make the same mistakes as we have done before. No one is arguing or asserting that political sensitivities should be ignored but it is not only governments who have political sensitivities…their citizens do as well which are sometimes at odds with their government. Robin articulated that point in an earlier post. And, of course, governments are always welcome at the GAC table and in any ICANN working group. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 2:56 pm, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://france.com/><http://France.com<http://france.com/>>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com/><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Liz Thanks for your reply. But you do not answer the fundamental question of why the burden should be shifted on hundreds of thousands of city governments to monitor proceedings of an organization 99.9% of them do not know, instead of maintaining the current approach where the party with the direct interest has to approach the city government at stake. As to facts: we are talking about serious issues and on procedures which were the result of a pluriannual work before 2012. The least is to present a good factual basis for any new ideas. We can only know if there are “mistakes” if we know the facts – otherwise these discussion is only about opinions… Regards Jorge Von: Liz Williams [mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:18 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello Jorge My suggestion about removing the very difficult “non-objection” process has, I hope, been improved by the clarity I wrote out before but perhaps not? Essentially it creates a level playing field for all objections which most certainly does not “gerrymander” governments out. It is, in fact, the reverse. With clearly spelt out processes where all objectors are created equal and have to meet the same obligations for their objections means that all objections are treated fairly. That is directly aligned with ICANN’s Mission and Core Values. That is also the centre of Mike Rodenbaugh’s strenuous comments where a few governments objected to some terms which is dramatically different to there being consensus GAC Advice which is presented to the ICANN board for its consideration. We shouldn’t conflate the two. And your continued insistent to provide “evidence or facts” is sometimes not possible when one is trying to float new ideas or turn ideas around or come up with better ways of doing things. We can sometimes rely on history to give us facts but we are also looking forward to make improvements and not make the same mistakes as we have done before. No one is arguing or asserting that political sensitivities should be ignored but it is not only governments who have political sensitivities…their citizens do as well which are sometimes at odds with their government. Robin articulated that point in an earlier post. And, of course, governments are always welcome at the GAC table and in any ICANN working group. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 2:56 pm, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://france.com/><http://France.com<http://france.com/>>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com/><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com%3chttp:/city.com/%3e%3e%3chttp:/city.com%3chttp:/city.com/%3e%3e>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/><http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au/%3e%3e%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au/%3e> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
I second Jorge: if a city name was applied for by somebody in a way that would not enable the full potential for the people of that city; who should read through all the applications – and understand the remits? Who should (once we are in first come first serve) constantly monitor the application flood? Many cities do not even have the requisite expertise – it already starts with the language barrier. Go to the constituency representatives of the city of Nairobi – do you think ANYBODY there is busy monitoring ICANN’s activities – even when they once had an ICANN meeting? It’s hard enough for a city to be involved once an applicant wants to apply. In absence of a letter of non-objection I can GUARANTEE you that about 5 to 10 applicant entities will flood the city gTLD space with about 500 to 2,000 applications. And they will get RICH QUICK by reselling them to local entities – and losing private auctions. Call it city-gTLD “tasting” or “warehousing”. Letters of non-objection at least put SOME burden on the applicant … and create real “competition” to have good policy (or policy at all). Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 8:23 AM To: liz.williams@auda.org.au Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Liz Thanks for your reply. But you do not answer the fundamental question of why the burden should be shifted on hundreds of thousands of city governments to monitor proceedings of an organization 99.9% of them do not know, instead of maintaining the current approach where the party with the direct interest has to approach the city government at stake. As to facts: we are talking about serious issues and on procedures which were the result of a pluriannual work before 2012. The least is to present a good factual basis for any new ideas. We can only know if there are “mistakes” if we know the facts – otherwise these discussion is only about opinions… Regards Jorge Von: Liz Williams [mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au] Gesendet: Freitag, 4. Mai 2018 07:18 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> > Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello Jorge My suggestion about removing the very difficult “non-objection” process has, I hope, been improved by the clarity I wrote out before but perhaps not? Essentially it creates a level playing field for all objections which most certainly does not “gerrymander” governments out. It is, in fact, the reverse. With clearly spelt out processes where all objectors are created equal and have to meet the same obligations for their objections means that all objections are treated fairly. That is directly aligned with ICANN’s Mission and Core Values. That is also the centre of Mike Rodenbaugh’s strenuous comments where a few governments objected to some terms which is dramatically different to there being consensus GAC Advice which is presented to the ICANN board for its consideration. We shouldn’t conflate the two. And your continued insistent to provide “evidence or facts” is sometimes not possible when one is trying to float new ideas or turn ideas around or come up with better ways of doing things. We can sometimes rely on history to give us facts but we are also looking forward to make improvements and not make the same mistakes as we have done before. No one is arguing or asserting that political sensitivities should be ignored but it is not only governments who have political sensitivities…their citizens do as well which are sometimes at odds with their government. Robin articulated that point in an earlier post. And, of course, governments are always welcome at the GAC table and in any ICANN working group. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 2:56 pm, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object“. To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams < <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> liz.williams@auda.org.au> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to “allow” bad policy to chase “poor” implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express “objection” to something. I would like to see the end of the “non-objection” process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, “objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don’t want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don’t object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> liz.williams@auda.org.au< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> <http://www.auda.org.au/> www.auda.org.au< <http://www.auda.org.au/> http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh < <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mike@rodenbaugh.com< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 <http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh < <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mike@rodenbaugh.com< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan < <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> < <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>, <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re <http://france.com/> France.com< <http://france.com/> http://France.com>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 <http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh < <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mike@rodenbaugh.com< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan < <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> < <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 <http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [ <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com< <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan < <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com< <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>; <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>; <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" < <http://city.com/> city.com< <http://city.com/> http://city.com/><; <http://city.com%3chttp:/city.com/%3e%3e%3chttp:/city.com%3chttp:/city.com/%3...> http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 <http://rodenbaugh.com%3chttp:/rodenbaugh.com/%3e> http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, < <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch< <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [ <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll < <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll < <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net< <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert < <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> alexander@schubert.berlin< <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>< <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin< <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>< <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin< <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [ <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake < <mailto:dave@davecake.net> dave@davecake.net< <mailto:dave@davecake.net> mailto:dave@davecake.net>< <mailto:dave@davecake.net> mailto:dave@davecake.net< <mailto:dave@davecake.net> mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>< <mailto:dave@davecake.net> mailto:dave@davecake.net< <mailto:dave@davecake.net> mailto:dave@davecake.net>< <mailto:dave@davecake.net> mailto:dave@davecake.net< <mailto:dave@davecake.net> mailto:dave@davecake.net>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake < <mailto:dave@davecake.net> dave@davecake.net< <mailto:dave@davecake.net> mailto:dave@davecake.net>< <mailto:dave@davecake.net> mailto:dave@davecake.net< <mailto:dave@davecake.net> mailto:dave@davecake.net>>< <mailto:dave@davecake.net> mailto:dave@davecake.net< <mailto:dave@davecake.net> mailto:dave@davecake.net>< <mailto:dave@davecake.net> mailto:dave@davecake.net< <mailto:dave@davecake.net> mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams < <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> liz.williams@auda.org.au< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> liz.williams@auda.org.au< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au< <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> <http://www.auda.org.au/> www.auda.org.au< <http://www.auda.org.au/> http://www.auda.org.au/><; <http://www.auda.org.au%3chttp:/www.auda.org.au/%3e%3e%3chttp:/www.auda.org.a...> http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org< <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Liz, i find your summary black&white description of Governments role in the last round frankly inappropriate, not only as a GAC member during that time, but also from my private view today and council member. In particular: * Disqualifying any AC just because they have no "operative" role is not the best argument I have heard in this community to make progress towards consensus * Any single Government could be the source of an early warning, and save applicants a lot of money (Patatagonia) and that would not imply any judgment on the whole GAC consensus * Government GACS reps worked very hard on reasonable rules for highly regulated sectors, just to make there applications feasible. Even from you own country! * The lack of policy based definitions of public interest and public interest commitments is an achilles heel of the 2012 AGB that can't be attributed solely to the GAC, but the whole PDP at the time. * If the GAC supported the ICANN transition, it was in most cases (actually in all cases but one) to take a larger and symmetric role in the (global-)(equal-) mutistakeholder model, not a diminished one. I would kindly ask you to moderate the acidity (pH) of your words, every time the word Government appears in the same sentence, accepting that this is not a "contentious" PDP, but the first time GAC has been invited to participate and co-chair the sub-track. Governments are MEMBERS of this community. i think that all sides and all opinions, all individuals and SOs/ACS deserve the same level of respectful treatment, even if we don't live under the same legal system and don't have as many lawyers present as the common law anglia group has. --- Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez El 2018-05-03 23:17, Liz Williams escribió:
Hello Jorge
My suggestion about removing the very difficult "non-objection" process has, I hope, been improved by the clarity I wrote out before but perhaps not? Essentially it creates a level playing field for all objections which most certainly does not "gerrymander" governments out. It is, in fact, the reverse. With clearly spelt out processes where all objectors are created equal and have to meet the same obligations for their objections means that all objections are treated fairly. That is directly aligned with ICANN's Mission and Core Values.
That is also the centre of Mike Rodenbaugh's strenuous comments where a few governments objected to some terms which is dramatically different to there being consensus GAC Advice which is presented to the ICANN board for its consideration. We shouldn't conflate the two.
And your continued insistent to provide "evidence or facts" is sometimes not possible when one is trying to float new ideas or turn ideas around or come up with better ways of doing things. We can sometimes rely on history to give us facts but we are also looking forward to make improvements and not make the same mistakes as we have done before.
No one is arguing or asserting that political sensitivities should be ignored but it is not only governments who have political sensitivities...their citizens do as well which are sometimes at odds with their government. Robin articulated that point in an earlier post. And, of course, governments are always welcome at the GAC table and in any ICANN working group.
Liz
.... Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au [4]
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 2:56 pm, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch wrote: Dear Liz
The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections.
The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object".
To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down.
More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game.
best regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Hello everyone
This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to "allow" bad policy to chase "poor" implementation.
I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express "objection" to something. I would like to see the end of the "non-objection" process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, "objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don't want something to happen. Here are the steps.
1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like.
2. If you don't object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past).
3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble.
The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators.
Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process.
I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB.
Liz
.... Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au [1]<http://www.auda.org.au [1]>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> wrote:
Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com [2]<http://France.com [2]>.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge
________________________________
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names - this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com [3]<http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City "insurances", City "salami", City "whatever"...) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name - because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution...
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
[cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30]
________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: ".....but a 'first right' based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?"
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise "important") cities:
Nobody has a "first right" obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) - I think we do not have to search for "international law"; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to "some entity" - but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a "sense of common good" OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about "minor" geographical entities - such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: ".new" and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve "protection" from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention - there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like 'capital' is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the "success" of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a "is the word a capital city" question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don't have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don't recommend "letters of support or non-objection". They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
.... Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> www.auda.org.au [1]<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Links: ------ [1] http://www.auda.org.au/ [2] http://france.com/ [3] http://city.com/ [4] http://www.auda.org.au
Thank you Carlos I have addressed some of your comments in line below. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 8 May 2018, at 12:35 pm, Carlos Raul Gutierrez <carlosraul@gutierrez.se<mailto:carlosraul@gutierrez.se>> wrote: Liz, i find your summary black&white description of Governments role in the last round frankly inappropriate, not only as a GAC member during that time, but also from my private view today and council member. In particular: * Disqualifying any AC just because they have no "operative" role is not the best argument I have heard in this community to make progress towards consensus I did not disqualify any AC. What I said was that there is tension between the role of national governments as individual entities and then, in the ICANN context, the role of governments as members of the GAC. The two roles are quite different and require nuanced handling. * Any single Government could be the source of an early warning, and save applicants a lot of money (Patatagonia) and that would not imply any judgment on the whole GAC consensus Yes that is indeed the case and a welcome intervention from governments through any objection process. * Government GACS reps worked very hard on reasonable rules for highly regulated sectors, just to make there applications feasible. Even from you own country! Yes that is indeed true…we support of GAC representatives very closely and that is part of our job. I supported, years ago in a different context, the .Sydney and .melbourne city bids and, during the application process both the bids for .moscow and its IDN equivalent. * The lack of policy based definitions of public interest and public interest commitments is an achilles heel of the 2012 AGB that can't be attributed solely to the GAC, but the whole PDP at the time. Yes you are correct and I didn’t ever claim it was the “fault” of the GAC. We can all work harder on getting public interest definitions more closely articulated. The GAC is not, nor is any government, the sole arbiter of the definition of the public interest. Robin has set out those arguments better than I have. * If the GAC supported the ICANN transition, it was in most cases (actually in all cases but one) to take a larger and symmetric role in the (global-)(equal-) mutistakeholder model, not a diminished one. I would kindly ask you to moderate the acidity (pH) of your words, every time the word Government appears in the same sentence, accepting that this is not a "contentious" PDP, but the first time GAC has been invited to participate and co-chair the sub-track. This is indeed a contentious PDP…that is obvious from the long email trail from many different perspectives and, in retrospect, some of the issues we raise here were the most difficult to handle. I am sorry you find my tone acid. That is not at all my intention but I do speak plainly and carefully and always welcome other points of view. Governments are MEMBERS of this community. i think that all sides and all opinions, all individuals and SOs/ACS deserve the same level of respectful treatment, even if we don't live under the same legal system and don't have as many lawyers present as the common law anglia group has. Yes you are indeed correct that all members of the community should be treated with respect. That was raised in an earlier thread today and I look forward to seeing it more carefully considered across the board. I don’t think being a lawyer has anything to do with it…I am not one either. Liz --- Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez El 2018-05-03 23:17, Liz Williams escribió: Hello Jorge My suggestion about removing the very difficult "non-objection" process has, I hope, been improved by the clarity I wrote out before but perhaps not? Essentially it creates a level playing field for all objections which most certainly does not "gerrymander" governments out. It is, in fact, the reverse. With clearly spelt out processes where all objectors are created equal and have to meet the same obligations for their objections means that all objections are treated fairly. That is directly aligned with ICANN's Mission and Core Values. That is also the centre of Mike Rodenbaugh's strenuous comments where a few governments objected to some terms which is dramatically different to there being consensus GAC Advice which is presented to the ICANN board for its consideration. We shouldn't conflate the two. And your continued insistent to provide "evidence or facts" is sometimes not possible when one is trying to float new ideas or turn ideas around or come up with better ways of doing things. We can sometimes rely on history to give us facts but we are also looking forward to make improvements and not make the same mistakes as we have done before. No one is arguing or asserting that political sensitivities should be ignored but it is not only governments who have political sensitivities...their citizens do as well which are sometimes at odds with their government. Robin articulated that point in an earlier post. And, of course, governments are always welcome at the GAC table and in any ICANN working group. Liz .... Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 2:56 pm, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote: Dear Liz The burden to obtain the non-objection is fairly put on the applicant, who has, as you also say, a direct interest in avoiding objections. The city governments of this world (we have 2000+ in tiny Switzerland), whose name is applied to by an applicant in a widely unknown setting which is ICANN cannot be expected to be privy to such procedures and to be monitoring the rounds of applications. This is of course much more difficult for developing and large countries, whose cities may realize one day that their name was taken as a TLD in a process they did not know, because they did not „object". To the larger point: you argue/assert that the non-objection letter should not be continued. Alas you have produced no factual basis that would warrant that, beyond one case (africa) where the problems were of an unrelated character, another (amazon) that did NOT fall under the non objection rule, which leaves us with one case (tata) where issues may be analyzed and addressed without changing the system and putting the incentive structure completely upside-down. More broadly speaking, ICANN cannot just ignore the political sensitivities, which are backed by different policies, laws etc. depending on the corresponding country. You need their representatives at the table and non-objecting if you want to avoid protracted issues. These kinds of issues only would grow if you gerrymander those public authorities out of the game. best regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> Datum: 4. Mai 2018 um 00:48:00 MESZ An: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Hello everyone This thread has brought out some really interesting ideas. I may have a simpler solution because what we are really talking about, in many cases, is backward looking difficult history from which we need to move on. We should not be satisfied with a 2007 policy and a 2012 implementation if it continues to "allow" bad policy to chase "poor" implementation. I may have a solution though because what we are essentially talking about also is how a interested stakeholder can express "objection" to something. I would like to see the end of the "non-objection" process all together, for reasons explained in other posts. However, "objecting to an application" is still a legitimate course of action for someone to take if they don't want something to happen. Here are the steps. 1. If you support something, say so. This is really up to an applicant to do the footwork to demonstrate in an application that this has taken place. We can then think on implementation elements of what that could look like. 2. If you don't object to something, allow it to happen. If you change your mind, you must do it within agreed strict time parameters see point 3. (Non-Objection letters will be a thing of the past). 3. If you do object, make an appropriately framed objection whoever you are. Within that objection process, refer to international law, domestic law, ISO standards and so on that are relevant to the applicant & the application. This takes out the endless discussion here about what should be referred to which causes such trouble. The applicant takes responsibility for ensuring that they submit an application which addresses those points and avoids an objection (all applicants are highly motivated to avoid objections). An objector must use those standards; pay for making the objection and submit it within appropriate time frames. Evaluators then take those objections into account in evaluation. An objector (whoever they are) must accept that their objection may be discarded by evaluators. Then we can close off the endless circular differences between jurisdictions and we focus on the real work that takes place for an applicant in an application process. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues because this could apply to a) any application and b) geographic terms in particular. Our policy recommendation then comes around to open process, objective criteria, assumption of compliance with law, competition and innovation. The points above are then implementation guidelines that improve an AGB. Liz .... Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. On 4 May 2018, at 4:50 am, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> wrote: Maybe Staff can help compile any such laws and cases related to domains? We should deal with concrete examples, as I have given re 4 TLD applications from the last round. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote: Dear Mike There are similar laws in other countries. For Switzerland you can look it up online quite easily (in various languages). There is case-law but I guess the court decisions will be in German and French. Besides, limits to register solely city names and other geographic terms as such as trademarks or business names are also common... On the other hand, as said before, rights on brands are limited to specific categories of products and services... In the end, as said, you have different interests converging on a single string, where in our opinion the public interest is paramount. Best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:26:08 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I would like to see the text of such laws, and any cases that apply them to domain names. I guess there might be one in France too, but I haven't dug into the particulars of the French legal proceedings re France.com<http://france.com/><http://France.com<http://france.com/>>. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:19 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> wrote: Dear Mike I mentioned some, eg in Switzerland cities have rights to protect their names under the civil code (art. 29), and provisions prevent the registration of business names and trademarks that solely consist of city names. best Jorge ________________________________ Von: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>> Datum: 3. Mai 2018 um 19:06:27 MESZ An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>, mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>, gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com><mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>>>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com><mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>>>; mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com<http://city.com/><http://city.com/><http://city.com<http://city.com/>><http://city.com<http://city.com/>>> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch><mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>>> wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City "insurances", City "salami", City "whatever"...) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution... Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net><mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>>>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö [cid:image001.png@01D3E2D4.C11E9F30] ________________________________ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin><mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin<mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: ".....but a 'first right' based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?" If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise "important") cities: Nobody has a "first right" obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for "international law"; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to "some entity" – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a "sense of common good" OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about "minor" geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: ".new" and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve "protection" from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net><mailto:dave@davecake.net<mailto:dave@davecake.net>>>> wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like 'capital' is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>>> wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the "success" of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a "is the word a capital city" question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don't have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don't recommend "letters of support or non-objection". They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz .... Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au><mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au<mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>>> www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au/><http://www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/>><http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Not everything is regulated by laws. There are moral values OUTSIDE of the law. Too many here seem to see Governments as predatory entities trying to “take away rights” from The People. But the interest of The People in having control and oversight of their identity (city gTLD) needs to be protected, too. Hence The People have to provide a letter of non-objection; and logically it is their representatives who facilitate the administrative procedure: the local Government. I do agree that if there is more than ONE sizeable (or otherwise “important”) geo entity with the identical name all of them should be involved. So we need to come up with a threshold or system under which circumstances other cities need to provide letters of non-objection as well. Cambridge seems clear – both will have to agree. Berlin? The largest other Berlin has about 10k people. Is there a need to acquire a letter of non-objection in a case of 3.5 Million vs 10k people? The question is how to wrap that in policy. But to say: “Oh, it’s all complicated, let the portfolio applicants blanket the city gTLD space with 1,000+ applications – and then the real city initiatives will have to buy the portfolio guys out” – nope. Not going to happen. Btw: 50% of all countries are population-wise smaller than a city like Berlin. ALL of these country names will (seemingly again, as in 2012) be EXCEMPTED from registration – because not even a letter of non-objection was deemed good enough for GAC. Why not granting big cities a similar protection as small countries have? Isn’t Tokyo at least as important as Latvia? I think definitely YES: 40 Million (Tokyo) vs 2 Million (Latvia) – Latvia is protected – so should be Tokyo! What about a policy element that states: “Cities and other geo-entities with a population higher X will need a letter of non-objection from the relevant local Government(s)”. Say X equals 100,000 people (needs to be discussed). Now every city with more than 100k inhabitants will have to be looped in. If there are TWO (Cambridge) – then BOTH have to provide such letter. Paris: The Texas one has only 25k people. Too small. This way large cities are protected. If two share the same name the smaller one is protected as well; if it has a sizeable population. MUCH better than ZERO protections. Question to the group: Where do we place X in the next round? Obviously X can vary from round to round. X = 100k people? 50k? Not many city gTLD applicants will form to apply for a smaller city – and IF it will surely be a local initiative. Think “.aspen”! The Aspen hotel and lodging association can EASILY fund the operation – no need to recoup operation costs via registration fees. Different business model entirely. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 8:06 PM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist. Thanks, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> > wrote: Dear Mike Thanks for your input. In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law. Best regards Jorge Von: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com> ] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> > Cc: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> >; mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> ; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com <http://city.com> > or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> > wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> ] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> > Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> > Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> > wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö _____ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <dave@davecake.net> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> > wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> > wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
It is far beyond ICANN's remit to regulate moral values outside of law. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Alexander Schubert < alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote:
Not everything is regulated by laws. There are moral values OUTSIDE of the law. Too many here seem to see Governments as predatory entities trying to “take away rights” from The People. But the interest of The People in having control and oversight of their identity (city gTLD) needs to be protected, too. Hence The People have to provide a letter of non-objection; and logically it is their representatives who facilitate the administrative procedure: the local Government.
I do agree that if there is more than ONE sizeable (or otherwise “important”) geo entity with the identical name all of them should be involved. So we need to come up with a threshold or system under which circumstances other cities need to provide letters of non-objection as well. Cambridge seems clear – both will have to agree. Berlin? The largest other Berlin has about 10k people. Is there a need to acquire a letter of non-objection in a case of 3.5 Million vs 10k people? The question is how to wrap that in policy.
But to say: “Oh, it’s all complicated, let the portfolio applicants blanket the city gTLD space with 1,000+ applications – and then the real city initiatives will have to buy the portfolio guys out” – nope. Not going to happen.
Btw: 50% of all countries are population-wise smaller than a city like Berlin. ALL of these country names will (seemingly again, as in 2012) be EXCEMPTED from registration – because not even a letter of non-objection was deemed good enough for GAC. Why not granting big cities a similar protection as small countries have? Isn’t Tokyo at least as important as Latvia? I think definitely YES: 40 Million (Tokyo) vs 2 Million (Latvia) – Latvia is protected – so should be Tokyo!
What about a policy element that states: “Cities and other geo-entities with a population higher X will need a letter of non-objection from the relevant local Government(s)”. Say X equals 100,000 people (needs to be discussed). Now every city with more than 100k inhabitants will have to be looped in. If there are TWO (Cambridge) – then BOTH have to provide such letter. Paris: The Texas one has only 25k people. Too small.
This way large cities are protected. If two share the same name the smaller one is protected as well; if it has a sizeable population. MUCH better than ZERO protections. Question to the group: Where do we place X in the next round? Obviously X can vary from round to round. X = 100k people? 50k? Not many city gTLD applicants will form to apply for a smaller city – and IF it will surely be a local initiative. Think “.aspen”! The Aspen hotel and lodging association can EASILY fund the operation – no need to recoup operation costs via registration fees. Different business model entirely.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
*From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Mike Rodenbaugh *Sent:* Thursday, May 03, 2018 8:06 PM *To:* Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks,
Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names – this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
*Von:* Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com] *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 *An:* Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> *Cc:* Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; mmoll@ca.inter.net; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org *Betreff:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
*Von:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] *Im Auftrag von *Greg Shatan *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 *An:* Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> *Cc:* Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> *Betreff:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. *The Geo Case*: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa)
2. *The Non-Geo Case*: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
------------------------------
*From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM *To:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: *“…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”*
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
*From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Greg Shatan *Sent:* Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM *To:* David Cake <dave@davecake.net> <dave@davecake.net> *Cc:* leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann. org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the *droit de seigneur*, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Maybe a Gift? --- Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- mQENBFqh7xwBCAC7PBUUek72U8teLrAieWI+JBo/nz0rQObzKgzGNWm2bb+i90mD roNsrvwDJiGOsB/VAhJy6ilIhs++QrxhVEzMz6oKJa8ANaNNvnK2Z8heYm1aC97E qY6y1z853b6F3XrN8262dor9NZEqaK28NVwLsFTfkGKhb4f3rJlCDmhwxt5VHhBQ MHKGxyutq0fyJpG6QpoAoRLaYXrq+xjXARhN9JBjeRRzbjnBbWt7+lRdCrZdOxfD ivRut9F2zMJq8RmeI5goTcq03IRLtKf41A6Np5K//HLe7GlHWH9g4pSKF+UB+EMe S506TxI0dVbyT3jlTnhhfNA/bpQXHcdCZ5EhABEBAAG0F2Nhcmxvc3JhdWxAZ3V0 aWVycmV6LnNliQEcBBABAgAGBQJaoe8cAAoJEOkK/VKjr2tvztgH/1zInwNszd4w 21UilxVmXX2J1SPZG6xXwbwU5BukIm7iBVYwxxPlIAZdJbG0/QynK2oWU1e1Zjed vBemfJtjOn2yRWo3P13PUV/2/trHWgUk5bA3eIUbWDW5fQRLW+TaHC7TuRKgRaJC NgdBItEniQz7DakGzld3PWmsTvIWd4N/fqzATD3DOZmONF52lyVuAEvKoF4rMRTR emvCrL66xEu19u9+Urk7R+DQuFQMNuX0MqC6/vIsmXYZPH7jnV6ZDyzb0BUnjYcx 6MH/YwJx29yjA4iN1NpwCpy1hc+YP1oavz2t+6isM6wB0mXlAazw2d83zwypsH6C 8xgjuRFm9xQ= =RX04 -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- El 2018-05-03 11:06, Mike Rodenbaugh escribió:
Jorge, what law provides for governments to claim superior rights to geographic (or any other) domain names? I am not aware of any, so am eager to be enlightened if they exist.
Thanks, Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:49 AM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear Mike
Thanks for your input.
In the end we have different bodies, entities etc. holding interests on one single string. In our view (Swiss perspective), public interest provides for clear limits to private monopolization over geographic names such as city names - this is reflected in law.
Best regards
Jorge
VON: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com] GESENDET: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 09:49 AN: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> CC: Gregory S. Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; mmoll@ca.inter.net; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org BETREFF: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com [1]> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City "insurances", City "salami", City "whatever"...) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name - because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution...
Best regards
Jorge
VON: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] IM AUFTRAG VON Greg Shatan GESENDET: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 AN: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> CC: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> BETREFF: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa)
2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
-------------------------
FROM: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> SENT: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM TO: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org SUBJECT: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: _".....BUT A 'FIRST RIGHT' BASED ON A GEOGRAPHIC NAME IS TROUBLESOME ON SEVERAL LEVELS. BUT ONE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION JUMPS OUT -- WHAT RIGHT IS THIS FIRST RIGHT BASED ON?"_
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise "important") cities:
Nobody has a "first right" obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) - I think we do not have to search for "international law"; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to "some entity" - but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a "sense of common good" OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about "minor" geographical entities - such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: ".new" and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve "protection" from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention - there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
FROM: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] ON BEHALF OF Greg Shatan SENT: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM TO: David Cake <dave@davecake.net> CC: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> SUBJECT: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the _droit de seigneur_, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like 'capital' is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the "success" of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a "is the word a capital city" question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don't have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don't recommend "letters of support or non-objection". They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
.... Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au [2]
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [3]
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [3]
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [3] _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [3] _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [3] _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 Links: ------ [1] http://city.com [2] http://www.auda.org.au/ [3] https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Mike, This is NOT about “Governments” – as these are usually never the city gTLD applicants. In most cases it is (and SHOULD be) a consortium of stakeholders representing the city constituents – the “Government” usually merely supports; but has no “ownership” of any sort. And in most cases doesn’t WANT – as that is not their “business”. So when we look at the issue I must clearly support Jorge – who is quite wise in these matters: A “trade mark” and a gTLD string are incomparable. A trade mark is always ONLY “protected” for a very tiny, tiny set of goods and services – you can’t even protect a trade mark for an ENTIRE Nice class – you must specify what WITHIN that class shall be protected. Trademarks rather protect the use IN THE SPECIFIED very narrow classification – and NOT the “string” itself. So you guys are turning the TM law upside down a bit :D A city gTLD however is unique – and once it’s gone the constituents of said city have lost their opportunity to express their identity. So yes: A city Government COULD (if they fancy their own gTLD for tourism and eGovernment) utilize a string such as you proposed (city name plus an addition). But I really do not care about these very rare cases. I care about the typical city gTLD like .berlin – something owned by hundreds of stakeholder entities – managed with a constituency policy board, etc. City gTLDs are NOT about Governments – or the gTLD operator. They are about the CITIZENS OF THAT CITY – the constituencies of the place. THEY would be significantly harmed if deprived to utilize the string that is predominantly affiliated with their city! If there are two cities with similar importance (Cambridge UK vs USA for example) – then both can easily join forces and work together. These cases are SUPER RARE btw – mostly other cities are tiny and the city name is clearly affiliated with the large one. Nobody right in their mind would assume a .paris based domain would have the gTLD operator in Texas. But it would be fair if people in Paris Texas can register .paris domains, too! The entire AGB 2012 notion that if somebody applied for a string identical to a city but doesn’t intend to “use it that way”: We should throw that out. It literally doesn’t matter what somebody “intends”. If it is an open gTLD then people from that city WILL register domains; whether or not you “market” the domain to them! Most registries do little to zero marketing anyways – they make the string available and try to get shelf-space. If it is a closed registry (e.g. .brand) then it’s even worse: nobody in the city can register. So why not simply getting rid of that rule? I do agree however that we should “draw a line”: If a term like “bar” is worldwide affiliated with places where you buy drinks; then why does a tiny place “bar” has the right to stop the generic term gTLD? Doesn’t make sense. The question is: how to draw such line? Lists? Repositories? “Beauty Contest”-style panels? In 2012 there was no real “line” – there was a list of place names in ISO 3166 – I don’t think it worked so well. It missed LOTS of big places – and included TONS of unimportant ones. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 10:49 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com <http://city.com> > or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy. To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds. Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period. Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it. In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues. This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> > wrote: Dear all The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string. City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case. As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name. Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD. The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution… Best regards Jorge Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> ] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> > Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> > Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term: 1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia) For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not. For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems. I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues. Greg On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net> > wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them. In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments. Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope...... Marita On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all, Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens. For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III. Best, Yrjö _____ From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names Dear Greg, You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?” If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities: Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe. But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River. The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People. Thanks, Alexander.berlin From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <mailto:dave@davecake.net> <dave@davecake.net> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings). I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies. Greg On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net> > wrote: Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one. David (resident of the Western Australian Perth) On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> > wrote: Hello everyone I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels. For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis. Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages. And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names. That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example). I look forward to hearing the views of others. Liz …. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Dear Alexander, I always like arguing with you about such matters :) I care about the 80's rock band Berlin, and the estate of the great composer Irving Berlin, and four other live US trademark registrants of the word BERLIN for their products ranging from ceiling fans to chiropractic services. It's neat if they can all register names in .berlin, but why does the government of a German city get to choose who runs that global domain name registry? The real answer to that question, is because of your intense lobbying and hard work at ICANN and in Berlin for about a decade. But we don't care as much about the past as about future policy, which I strongly believe should be changed such that governments have no preferential rights they are not accorded by international law. The ISO list is based in international law, that is why it was chosen, and because ICANN should not be drawing any other "lines". Other names not on that list were not precluded by ICANN, were subject to expensive applications, and then were ruined by government objections entirely unfounded in international law. These include .Thai, .GCC, .PersianGulf and of course .Amazon. In my view, we should maintain the clear rule of the ISO list, and further make it clear that anything else is fair game for anyone, regardless of any government objection. Best, Mike Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 6:21 AM, Alexander Schubert < alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote:
Dear Mike,
This is NOT about “Governments” – as these are usually never the city gTLD applicants. In most cases it is (and SHOULD be) a consortium of stakeholders representing the city constituents – the “Government” usually merely supports; but has no “ownership” of any sort. And in most cases doesn’t WANT – as that is not their “business”.
So when we look at the issue I must clearly support Jorge – who is quite wise in these matters:
A “trade mark” and a gTLD string are incomparable. A trade mark is always ONLY “protected” for a very tiny, tiny set of goods and services – you can’t even protect a trade mark for an ENTIRE Nice class – you must specify what WITHIN that class shall be protected. Trademarks rather protect the use IN THE SPECIFIED very narrow classification – and NOT the “string” itself. So you guys are turning the TM law upside down a bit :D A city gTLD however is unique – and once it’s gone the constituents of said city have lost their opportunity to express their identity.
So yes: A city Government COULD (if they fancy their own gTLD for tourism and eGovernment) utilize a string such as you proposed (city name plus an addition). But I really do not care about these very rare cases. I care about the typical city gTLD like .berlin – something owned by hundreds of stakeholder entities – managed with a constituency policy board, etc.
City gTLDs are NOT about Governments – or the gTLD operator. They are about the CITIZENS OF THAT CITY – the constituencies of the place. THEY would be significantly harmed if deprived to utilize the string that is predominantly affiliated with their city! If there are two cities with similar importance (Cambridge UK vs USA for example) – then both can easily join forces and work together. These cases are SUPER RARE btw – mostly other cities are tiny and the city name is clearly affiliated with the large one. Nobody right in their mind would assume a .paris based domain would have the gTLD operator in Texas. But it would be fair if people in Paris Texas can register .paris domains, too!
The entire AGB 2012 notion that if somebody applied for a string identical to a city but doesn’t intend to “use it that way”: We should throw that out. It literally doesn’t matter what somebody “intends”. If it is an open gTLD then people from that city WILL register domains; whether or not you “market” the domain to them! Most registries do little to zero marketing anyways – they make the string available and try to get shelf-space. If it is a closed registry (e.g. .brand) then it’s even worse: nobody in the city can register. So why not simply getting rid of that rule?
I do agree however that we should “draw a line”: If a term like “bar” is worldwide affiliated with places where you buy drinks; then why does a tiny place “bar” has the right to stop the generic term gTLD? Doesn’t make sense. The question is: how to draw such line? Lists? Repositories? “Beauty Contest”-style panels? In 2012 there was no real “line” – there was a list of place names in ISO 3166 – I don’t think it worked so well. It missed LOTS of big places – and included TONS of unimportant ones.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
*From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Mike Rodenbaugh *Sent:* Thursday, May 03, 2018 10:49 AM *To:* Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Governments also have infinite, obvious alternatives to <.city> TLDs, such as <.citygovernment>, <.citycouncil>, <.citytourism>, etc. Perhaps surprisingly, governments have managed to survive for the past 30 years even though they have not had the legal the right to "their" <city.com> or even <city.ccTLD> second level domain names. They still have no such legal right at any level of the DNS. Some governments' fantasy to own such rights is just that, fantasy.
To be sure, ICANN is not the proper body to grant governments such a right. But unfortunately, ICANN went far too far in the last round kowtowing to governments, and requiring the "non-objection" letter. That led to outright extortion by such well known geographic areas as SPA and BAR, among others, who had nothing more that a fantasy to control TLD rights to that name, plus ICANN's ill-advised, non-community-consensus requirement of the non-objection letter. As I recall (and I could be wrong and will eat my shoe), that was an ICANN Staff implementation gift, not part of the consensus policy passed by GNSO and the Board. Even if it was, it was ill-advised then, and should be eliminated for future rounds.
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments, extended stupidly to the second level by ICANN in the last round, solely to appease government obstructionists in that last round. Subsidiary governments need to get over this; they don't have further rights to "their" name in the DNS. Period.
Paris, France has no greater rights to .PARIS than Paris, Texas. Or Paris Hilton. Period. But I would love to hear them fight out that issue. ICANN certainly should not have predetermined it in favor of France or Texas, to the detriment of Ms. Hilton (and so many other legitimate users of the word Paris). All three of those parties (at least) had equal rights to that TLD, and should have been put into a contention set to resolve it.
In substantial part, governments continue to rehash arguments made by IGOs in the various IGO Names policy discussions. Those IGOs get nowhere with the broader GNSO community because they only have fantasy rights to "their" names (in many cases) and acronyms (in almost all cases). So they scream to the Board and have delayed finality in those discussions for half a decade already. But the GNSO is never going to agree with them, and the GNSO has primary TLD policy responsibility under the Bylaws, not the GAC. Eventually, the Board must side with the GNSO, though they will put that off forever if they can, as they have done with IGO Names issues.
This GNSO group ought not be considering government pressure or fantasy rights. If the Board wants to do so, that is their prerogative. We need to develop policy in the real world, where governments coexist with businesses and other users of "their" names. They have done so for 30 years. I am confident in stating that not a single government has fallen, nor even been harmed, by the ability of absolutely anyone to register "their" name at the second level or at the top level. Until any such harm is shown, why are we even discussing this? What problem are we trying to solve, exactly?
Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City “insurances”, City “salami”, City “whatever”…) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name – because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
*Von:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] *Im Auftrag von *Greg Shatan *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 *An:* Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> *Cc:* Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> *Betreff:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. *The Geo Case*: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa)
2. *The Non-Geo Case*: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
------------------------------
*From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> <alexander@schubert.berlin> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM *To:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: *“…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”*
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
*From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Greg Shatan *Sent:* Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM *To:* David Cake <dave@davecake.net> <dave@davecake.net> *Cc:* leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann. org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the *droit de seigneur*, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Mike, _just one request for an historical clarification below_ --- Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez El 2018-05-03 01:49, Mike Rodenbaugh escribió:
Country codes have been given special status in the DNS with ccTLDs and correspondent restrictions at the second level of the New gTLDs. That was an original gift to national governments,
A "GIFT" b_ased on which legal body, treaty or bottom up policy development? Who decides who gets a gift and how doesn't after Mr. Postels death? Did he leave a written will?_
_thanks_
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:28 PM, <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Dear all
The fundamental flaw with such an approach is that it forgets that TLDs are unique. There can be only one TLD with a given city name. there can be only one delegation of such a string.
City governments have political, social, historical, economic and legal responsibilities over their cities, and have (at least in Switzerland and other countries) rights on the names of their cities. There might be several cities with the same name, but under the 2012 AGB you had to obtain the non-objection from all of them if that was the case.
As for brands there may be unlimited numbers of business names and trademarks that use a given city name, usually as part of their names (e.g. City "insurances", City "salami", City "whatever"...) and with figurative elements beyond the name as such (the color, the font, symbols, etc.). For instance in Switzerland you are not allowed to register a city name as such as a business name - because this would mean that a private business is monopolizing that geographic name.
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution...
Best regards
Jorge
VON: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] IM AUFTRAG VON Greg Shatan GESENDET: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 AN: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> CC: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> BETREFF: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa)
2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
-------------------------
FROM: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> SENT: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM TO: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org SUBJECT: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: _".....BUT A 'FIRST RIGHT' BASED ON A GEOGRAPHIC NAME IS TROUBLESOME ON SEVERAL LEVELS. BUT ONE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION JUMPS OUT -- WHAT RIGHT IS THIS FIRST RIGHT BASED ON?"_
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise "important") cities:
Nobody has a "first right" obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) - I think we do not have to search for "international law"; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to "some entity" - but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a "sense of common good" OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about "minor" geographical entities - such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: ".new" and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve "protection" from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention - there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
FROM: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] ON BEHALF OF Greg Shatan SENT: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM TO: David Cake <dave@davecake.net> CC: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> SUBJECT: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the _droit de seigneur_, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like 'capital' is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the "success" of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a "is the word a capital city" question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don't have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don't recommend "letters of support or non-objection". They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
.... Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au [1]
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [2]
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [2]
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [2] _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [2] _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [2] _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 Links: ------ [1] http://www.auda.org.au/ [2] https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
On 3 May 2018, at 2:28 pm, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch wrote:
Hence the crux, resolved in 2012 by the non-objection letter, was that several interests (public interests of a wide spectrum represented by the cities, community interests and multiple commercial interests in the form of brands) may converge on one string, one city name, one TLD.
Why should a geographical interest get special powers that enable them to override other interests, when the community interests, etc do not get the same veto power? In the last round the city of Spa had to not object before .spa can go ahead - so a community of around 10,000 people got special rights, even though spa is a common dictionary word in the English language, and the spa industry globally employs millions and is worth trillions. The current system seems wildly disproportionate. David
The non-objection letter was and is in our view a good way to get the more specific interests backing one application to a table with those who represent the corresponding city (and its public policy interests), in order to try to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution…
Best regards
Jorge
Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2018 06:27 An: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> Cc: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>> Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa) 2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
I think we have to consider these use cases separately. The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older). Blending them together just obscures the issues.
Greg
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> wrote: Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote: Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
<image001.png>
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert<alexander@schubert.berlin> <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: “…..but a ‘first right’ based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on?”
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise “important”) cities:
Nobody has a “first right” obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) – I think we do not have to search for “international law”; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to “some entity” – but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a “sense of common good” OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about “minor” geographical entities – such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: “.new” and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve “protection” from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention – there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM To: David Cake <dave@davecake.net> <mailto:dave@davecake.net> Cc: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the droit de seigneur, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net <mailto:dave@davecake.net>> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like ‘capital’ is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au>> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the “success” of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a “is the word a capital city” question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don’t have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don’t recommend “letters of support or non-objection”. They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
…. Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au <mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/>
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5>
Greg Very good mail and back to substance! _my reactions online below_ --- Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez El 2018-05-02 22:26, Greg Shatan escribió:
We need to distinguish between two major groups of potential use cases that arise when there is an application for a string that (among other things) is a geographic term:
1. The Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD applicant want to operate the gTLD as a "geographic" TLD (e.g., .berlin, .nyc, .africa)
_A revised evaluation set of rules, including policy based restrictions or PICs in terms of its __intense__ use, should apply in subsequent rounds_
2. The Non-Geo Case: The case where a new gTLD wants to operate the gTLD as something other than a geographic TLD -- a .brand, a generic gTLD, a restricted gTLD (e.g., .tata, .spa, .amazon, .patagonia)
_If you don't have a very __strong__ trademark protection __the__ geo-area of your name and got a letter of support for your __application__, if you don't belong to an internationally recognized D.O.C., if WIPO __doesn't give you anything like a letter of __support, ==> _try to get your application money back as soon as you get an early warning, like Patagonia did. For good reason!
For the Geo Case, it may be that there are few instances where support/non-objection letters caused problems in the 2012 round. One "problem" instance is .africa. One would have to look at the universe of cases to determine whether all the rest worked well or not.
For the Non-Geo Case, it is clear that there were multiple instances where support/non-objection letters or similar exercises of power did cause problems. We can start with all four of the examples I've cited above. I would be curious to know if there were Non-Geo Cases that didn't have problems.
_Patgonia had no problem to get its money back after the initial early warning_
I think we have to consider these use cases separately.
_Agree_
The considerations that apply when a TLD will be operated as a geo TLD (e.g., Roma for Romans) do not apply when the TLD will be operated for other purposes (e.g., .sandwich for a food-related TLD -- Sandwich, MA was incorporated in 1639 and named after Sandwich, England, which is obviously older).
Blending them together just obscures the issues.
_Don't agree. We have blended together all AGB applications and now are looking at certain relevant categories to filter out issues. It has been my repeated view, that the best way to keep clarity in this __discussion, is to keep track on how "restrictive" the use of the delegated new gTLDs are. On the one extreme, the most restrictive use of new gTLDs have been the brands. More than extracting a monopoly rent, the have become exclusive beachfront property in the domain name __space where nobody else can walk in. I personally think that brand TLDs should go somewhere else, like a one stop office in WIPOs cellar, and get their TLDs. On the other hand some new gTLDs have no restrictions at all, and the price proves it, like .xyz. Instead of blending I have suggested an evaluation continuum from "high to low" (intended or not) use restrictions. _
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote:
Yes, cities can have long history in older cultures -- wars were fought and people died over them.
In Canada, municipal governments are subdivisions of their province. While they have autonomy on most decisions, all by-laws passed are subject to change by the provincial government at any time. So cities exist at the pleasure of the provincial governments.
Leaves one to wonder if the province could deny the city the right to it's TLD.:-( This is a pretty slippery slope......
Marita
On 5/2/2018 11:17 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
-------------------------
FROM: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> SENT: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM TO: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org SUBJECT: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: _".....BUT A 'FIRST RIGHT' BASED ON A GEOGRAPHIC NAME IS TROUBLESOME ON SEVERAL LEVELS. BUT ONE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION JUMPS OUT -- WHAT RIGHT IS THIS FIRST RIGHT BASED ON?"_
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise "important") cities:
Nobody has a "first right" obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) - I think we do not have to search for "international law"; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to "some entity" - but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a "sense of common good" OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about "minor" geographical entities - such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: ".new" and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve "protection" from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention - there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
FROM: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] ON BEHALF OF Greg Shatan SENT: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM TO: David Cake <dave@davecake.net> CC: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> SUBJECT: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the _droit de seigneur_, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like 'capital' is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the "success" of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a "is the word a capital city" question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don't have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don't recommend "letters of support or non-objection". They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
.... Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au [1]
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [2]
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [2]
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [2] _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [2] _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 Links: ------ [1] http://www.auda.org.au/ [2] https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Thanks Yrjö!!! King Gustav must have been wise ruler if he didn't give the name away twice! My worries from a Latin American perspective, is that the Spanish Kings weren't consistent over time. And after almost 300 year of spreading city names based on famous saints in what is today Latin America, they let loose a single priest in California to spread the following names (many already existent in our countries) but now in the hands of the US like San Diego, San Jose, San Francisco, Santa Barbara, San Luis, San Juan Capistrano, San Antonio, etc. How do you think the people of Costa Rica would cry about their capital city San Jose (de Costa Rica), if it would go to a software unicorn just because we are not in the middle of Silicon Valley? Maybe cities that don't pass the high business oriented threshold Alexander is proposing, should find a (guaranteed, transparent and predictable) place at the second level. And let us go back to (less profitable but also valuable) GeoNames at the first level. --- Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez El 2018-05-02 09:17, Yrjö Länsipuro escribió:
Dear all,
Cities have been founded, incorporated and given various privileges - including their names - in the course of history by kings and emperors and other assorted authorities, and in my non-lawyer´s mind, documents attesting to those acts, scribbled on parchment or whatever, are the legal basis. More important, from end-users´ point of view, is the political ownership felt by the citizens.
For reference, attached please find an excerpt of the founding document of my home city Tampere/Tammerfors in 1779, signed by king Gustaf III.
Best,
Yrjö
-------------------------
FROM: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> SENT: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 5:16 PM TO: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org SUBJECT: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
Dear Greg,
You write: _".....BUT A 'FIRST RIGHT' BASED ON A GEOGRAPHIC NAME IS TROUBLESOME ON SEVERAL LEVELS. BUT ONE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION JUMPS OUT -- WHAT RIGHT IS THIS FIRST RIGHT BASED ON?"_
If we talk about sizeable (or otherwise "important") cities:
Nobody has a "first right" obviously. Why should anybody. But if a string is (should be) poised to serve as identifier for a sizeable amount of people (e.g. larger cities) - I think we do not have to search for "international law"; it should be self-evident that such an infrastructure resource like a city-gTLD is NOT assigned lightly to "some entity" - but that the representatives of the city are looped in. There is morality and a "sense of common good" OUTSIDE of established law. At least in Good Old Europe.
But I completely agree with you if we talk about "minor" geographical entities - such as a small stream or a hill. Or a tiny dwelling somewhere in the nowhere. Especially if there is an entity that is MUCH better known to the public (e.g. a well-known brand vs. a small mountain) or if it is identical to a generic term: ".new" and the New River.
The big question is: How do we policy the line that separates the entities that deserve "protection" from the rest? A repository? Lists of any sort? Population size? Or maybe a panel that decides case by case (caution: Beauty contest alarm)? But having no protections at all is not going to work. To LOWER the already low bar is bonkers in my mind. I wish GAC would pay more attention - there are forces trying to take away DNS infrastructure from The People.
Thanks,
Alexander.berlin
FROM: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] ON BEHALF OF Greg Shatan SENT: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:42 AM TO: David Cake <dave@davecake.net> CC: leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> SUBJECT: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names
I find myself generally in agreement with Liz Williams. There are more nuances to unpack than I have time for, but a "first right" based on a geographic name is troublesome on several levels. But one fundamental question jumps out -- what right is this first right based on? Is there a legal basis for this? (Jorge tells us that his government would make a decision "based on law", so it would be useful to know what law we're talking about.) Requiring a "letter of support or non-objection" is also troublesome and not just for the reasons Liz mentions. (I hope we do not have to pore through each of the letters of support/non-objection from the first round to highlight the problems they cause, but if we are going to, this should be a job for the WG as a whole, not an assignment for Liz.) I recognize that, as Jorge say, it "works well for governments." Well, of course it does! It completely favors governments, and was imposed by governments (i.e., the GAC). The problem is that it doesn't work well for anyone else, and it is not well-grounded in the rule of law (unless we are thinking of something akin to the _droit de seigneur_, or perhaps the Divine Right of Kings).
I don't know if I'll be able to be on any part of the call starting shortly, since it is running from 1-2:30 am my time, and I don't do well on 4 hours of sleep.... If am not, please accept my apologies.
Greg
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:48 PM, David Cake <dave@davecake.net> wrote:
Perth is not even unique within Australia, there is a small town in Tasmania. But the point about ambiguity remaining even if we restrict it to concepts like 'capital' is a very good one.
David (resident of the Western Australian Perth)
On 30 Apr 2018, at 1:18 pm, Liz Williams <liz.williams@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the "success" of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a "is the word a capital city" question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don't have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don't recommend "letters of support or non-objection". They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
.... Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au [1]
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 Links: ------ [1] http://www.auda.org.au/
Happy week to everybody! I'm trying to catch up with all ICANN work with a fresh look on Monday morning. The last call of the WT-5 happened well after midnight. Going trough the exchanges i have a forma question: Did the ST-5 agree to create a sub-track on GeoCities as per Liz's proposal? Reading in retrospect the exchanges after the call, I'm not sure if we are all still in the general GeoNames discussion, or if we have a separate sub-thread on GeoCities, another on GeoComunnities, etc. etc. (by the way there is better software to deal with sub-thread than email ,but hey, we are the internet). I would greatly appreciate some formal clarification and offer my applies if it was discussed during the call and i just missed it. Again, happy week ahead! --- Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez El 2018-04-29 23:18, Liz Williams escribió:
Hello everyone
I wanted to start a new thread of conversation about city names ahead of our upcoming conference call. We are being encouraged by our co-chairs to think about city names as TLDs. The first point is, perhaps, to recognise the "success" of some previous city TLDs including Berlin, Paris, NYC and so on. Those applications went through very specific requirements for evaluation and, now, hopefully serve the requirements of local communities. We should hope that, in any new round, the experiences of those cities will ease the way for future applications because we have learnt something about how and why applicants apply for place names (and I use the word place deliberately) as top level domain labels.
For our next round of policy recommendations I wanted to use an example which I think highlights the difficulties we face if we are prescriptive and limited in our analysis.
Most of us know that Perth is the capital city of Western Australia. It is not the capital city of Australia as Canberra has that honour. Relying on a "is the word a capital city" question is fraught with difficulty. It is difficult because Perth, Scotland, has at a bare minimum had city status since the 12th century, far longer than Perth, Australia which also has an indigenous place name, its colonial name and a migrant demographic where the largest majority of Perth residents come from England. Things are complicated by the existence of Perth in Canada which, in its own right, has some features of a capital and, at the very least, some important historic linkages.
And then we turn to the generic words which Jon Nevett highlighted in a previous post (Bath, Save, New) which are also place names.
That leads us to what can we usefully and objectively recommend as treatment of other names which are also linked to places and how those could be treated as top level domains. As a starting point, my recommendation would be that we don't have any special treatment for place names as TLDs and that applicants for those names would be evaluated against other business and technical criteria just like another application. However, we might want to think about better ways of handling an objection. Those objections, from whatever quarter, need to be treated in exactly the same way. I don't recommend "letters of support or non-objection". They are too subjective, fraught with movable political nuance and, in some cases, deeply sensitive geo-political facts (using Jerusalem as the example).
I look forward to hearing the views of others.
Liz
.... Dr Liz Williams | International Affairs .au Domain Administration Ltd M: +61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757 E: liz.williams@auda.org.au www.auda.org.au [1]
Important Notice This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
Links: ------ [1] http://www.auda.org.au
participants (26)
-
Alexander Schubert -
Annebeth Lange -
Arasteh -
Carlos Raul Gutierrez -
David Cake -
DE SALINS Ghislain -
Greg Shatan -
Harish Chowdhary -
Javier Rua -
Jeff Neuman -
Jon Nevett -
Jorge.Cancio＠bakom.admin.ch -
lists＠christopherwilkinson.eu Wilkinson -
Liz Williams -
Marita Moll -
Martin Sutton -
Mazzone, Giacomo -
Mike Rodenbaugh -
Nick Wenban-Smith -
Olga Cavalli -
Paul McGrady -
Paul Rosenzweig -
Poncelet Ileleji -
Robin Gross -
Sahlman Sanna -
Yrjö Länsipuro