IP Justice Comments on ICANN Policy Proposal for Trademarks & New GTLDs

By |May 10th, 2011|

Statement in public forum regarding ICANN Board response to "scorecard" of the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) on trademark protections for new generic top-level Internet domain names. The GAC is pressuring the ICANN Board to dramatically expand the rights of trademark owners after heavy lobbying by trademark industry of governmental representatives who participate at ICANN.

IP Justice Statement on ICANN’s Responsibility to Respect Human Rights

By |March 31st, 2011|

IP Justice submitted a statement today in response to the U.S. Department of Commerce National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) regarding its relationship with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).

In its submission, IP Justice argued that ICANN needs a better legal framework that will obligate the organization to respect internationally recognized legal […]

Support Multi-Stakeholderism at ICANN & Sign the Petition for No Govt. Veto on Domain Names

By |February 24th, 2011|

The Internet Governance Project has published a very important petition against a governmental power-grab over of the Internet's Domain Name System. Governments are pushing ICANN for a "veto" right to prevent any top-level domain "for any reason". Sign the petition to support multi-stakeholder bottom-up consensus policy at ICANN instead.

IP Justice Comments on ICANN Plans for New Top-Level Domains: Keep the Core Neutral – ICANN Should Avoid Expanding Scope of Mission to Include Enforcing “Morality” and Fighting “Terrorism”

By |July 21st, 2010|

IP Justice submitted brief comments today to ICANN regarding its plan for introducing new Top-Level Domains (TLDs). Specifically, IP Justice raised concerns about policy proposals that threaten freedom of expression on the Internet and seek to expand ICANN's mission to include ensuring "Morality and Public Order" (MAPO) and preventing "terrorism" through personal background checks. IP Justice believes both of these ICANN proposals are mis-guided and will harm the healthy development of the Internet and the global public interest.

IP Justice Comments on ICANN Accountability & Transparency Concerns: Lack of Accountability to Non-Commercial Users Remains Problematic for ICANN’s Promise to Protect the Public Interest

By |July 14th, 2010|

IP Justice is deeply concerned that ICANN is insufficiently accountable to relevant non-commercial interests. Certain interests, such as business interests (in particular the trademark and domain name industries) are over-represented at ICANN both in structure and in practice. On the other hand, non-commercial interests and individual Internet users are not given the appropriate representation, although some improvements have been made in recent years. There is a real worry that ICANN is an "industry organization" and works predominantly for trademark interests and the domain name industry. Too often non-commercial concerns are ignored by ICANN; without any real "muscle" behind non-commercial interests, ICANN has little incentive to protect those interests in its policy development process...

Statement of the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group (NCSG) and the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) on Transparency and ICANN Staff Documents

By |May 20th, 2010|

ICANN's transparency commitment demands the adoption of a principle of default openness for all Board communications except in those specific instances where it is over-ridden, in writing, by the principle of personal privacy or an explicit requirement of confidentiality. It is especially critical that policy matters and the contributions of supporting organizations and advisory committees be presented to the Board accurately and completely. While we appreciate the need for staff to summarize matters that are often complex, we must stress the importance of ensuring that these summaries accurately report the relevant facts and positions. Openness and public review will minimize inaccuracies, facilitating the role of staff while enhancing public confidence in the Board's decision-making process....

IP Justice Statement to ICANN on Need to Respect Decision of Independent Review Panel on .XXX Domain

By |May 10th, 2010|

IP Justice supports the swift adoption of the decision of the Independent Review Panel (IRP) by ICANN and the inclusion of the applied for .xxx domain name into the root. This IRP decision should not be, and cannot be, a referendum on pornography as some comments urge. This decision is only about ICANN's accountability mechanism - its means of correcting its past mistakes, and in particular its mishandling of the .xxx domain name application...

ICANN Accountability Post-JPA: No Meaningful Change Expected

By |September 30th, 2009|

While many are dancing in the streets over today's decision by the US Government to loosen some of its ties to ICANN as its a single governmental authority, I'm not convinced this decision will change much on a practical level. The Affirmation of Commitments was signed today by ICANN and the US Government to replace the Joint Project Agreement, and expand oversight to a more international community. Unfortunately ICANN still lacks any framework for meaningful accountability to the public. And recent efforts seem to indicate noncommercial interests are being systematically squeezed out of ICANN, which is dominated by lobbyists from big business and special interests. Adding more governments to ICANN's accountability framework is good on many levels since it recognizes the important global resource that we all share and depend upon and have a right to shape the policy of. ...

ICANN Staff Up To Same Old “Divide & Conquer” of Civil Society Strategy

By |September 22nd, 2009|

I had a conversation recently with a person who had been actively engaged at ICANN in its early days but became disillusioned and disengaged after a few years because his participation lead him to the conclusion that ICANN staff manage the organization's board of directors and the "community" via the GNSO and the At-Large Advisory Committee. He said the staff intentionally worked to stir up divisiveness between community participants in order to justify adopting the staff's own agenda. Before I even had the opportunity to say my first word about my own experience with participating at ICANN, this person who hadn't even been at ICANN in nearly 10 years spoke my thoughts and described my own experience about participating at ICANN for the last 5 years as I have. ...

Public Interest Groups in ICANN Appeal to New President For Fairer Treatment For Civil Society

By |September 3rd, 2009|

The organization that represents Non-Commercial Internet Users in the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) issued an open letter to the Board this week, expressing concern about the possible failure of ICANN's attempt to balance the representation of commercial and noncommercial interests.