IP Justice Comments on ICANN Proposal to Expand Trademarks Rights in Domain Names

By |July 6th, 2009|

IP Justice submitted comments today in opposition to the proposals contained in the "IRT Report" a proposal from ICANN's Intellectual Property Constituency to create new trademark rights to domain names that do not exist in law. ICANN's Noncommercial Users Constituency (NCUC) also filed comments with ICANN discussing thesubstantive problems with the proposal and also the procedural concerns, which led to the creation of a one-sided report....

Global Civil Society Weighs In Supporting Petition for a Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group at ICANN

By |May 1st, 2009|

Dozens of civil society organizations from all corners of the globe signed a statement submitted to ICANN's Public Forum supporting the proposal to form a Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group (NCSG) from the Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC). Supporters of NCUC's petition include non-commercial organizations such as Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Public Knowledge, FreePress, European Digital Rights Initiative, ARTICLE 19, EPIC, Rits-Brazil, Alfa-Redi, Association for Progressive Communications, African Commons, Internet Society of Mauritius, UWI At-Large, ICT Consumers Association of Kenya, Knowledge Ecology International, Privacy International, Yale Law School Information Society Project, and dozens more...

Public Interest NGO’s Express Concerns with Proposed Senate Bill on Intellectual Property Enforcement

By |September 10th, 2008|

Twelve Public Interest Organizations Send US Senate Judiciary Joint Letter on Concerns Regarding S.3325, the "Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Act of 2008": "The undersigned groups write to express our concerns with S. 3325, the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Act of 2008, soon to be marked up in the Committee on the Judiciary. While enforcing IP rights is necessary to ensuring the progress of science and the useful arts, an unbalanced approach to enforcement would lead to unintended harms and impede that progress. Several of the provisions contained within S. 3325 threaten such an imbalance...."

IP Justice Statement at IGF Open Consultation of IGF Dynamic Coalition for Access to Knowledge and Free Expression (A2K@IGF)

By |May 13th, 2008|

"IPR protection has always been given to creators and inventors in exchange for some benefit to the public. These are usually included in IP law as exceptions and limitations that can provide a benefit to the public. For example, when copyright owners permit the copying of their materials for private and educational use, they contribute to the general pool of knowledge available on the Internet. The practice of remixing, re-using, editing, and combining of audio-video and text to comment on culture and create transformative works depends upon a system of robust exceptions and limitations to exclusive rights. This coalition supports innovation and the creation of wealth through IPR incentivization, but we also seek to support alternative models for creating knowledge goods, including free and open source software, or open scholarly and scientific journals, and on-line access to scholarly research, publicly funded research, and essential documents such as legal information. The A2K@IGF coalition welcomes a discussion in Hyderabd that explores best practices for promoting sharing of knowledge and access to information and that explores a variety of business models designed to encourage creativity and innovation. We welcome participation from all stakeholders in this ongoing discussion to build an open and inclusive Internet to promote human development and individual empowerment...."

IP Justice White Paper on the Proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)

By |March 25th, 2008|

Anti-Consumer and Anti-Public Interest Treaty Proposed by Intellectual Property Industry, US, Europe, Switzerland, and Japan

ACTA’s Misguided Effort to Increase Govt Spying and Ratchet-Up IPR Enforcement at Public Expense

By |March 21st, 2008|

IP Justice Comments to the U.S.T.R. on the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). IP Justice firmly believes that ACTA’s costs to the public far outweigh any public benefit it might provide. The financial expense to tax-payers to fund ACTA would be enormous and steal scarce resources away from programs that deal with genuine public needs like providing education and eliminating hunger. ACTA would burden the judicial system and divert badly needed law enforcement and customs resources away from public security and towards private profit. Unfortunately the zeal to “beef-up” enforcement measures on which ACTA rides often leads to the violation of privacy rights, bypassing due process protections, and cutting-off the free flow of information. ACTA proposes to set new international norms to lock countries into pre-determined policy choices when flexibility is needed.

Comments to US Government on Review of Joint Project Agreement with ICANN by Robin Gross

By |February 15th, 2008|

"...In my view, given the international nature of the Internet, it is imperative that ICANN work toward moving away from oversight by a single nation and toward responding to the needs of the global Internet community. However, ICANN has yet to demonstrate that it has sufficiently evolved to the point that it should be left without any oversight and accountability, although it has made some progress in recent years. There remain significant problems with the existing structure and management of ICANN that must be resolved before ICANN can be left to itself to manage this crucial and shared public resource. In particular, “Internet users” (or the public-at-large) still remain outside of the ICANN decision-making process, such that the concerns of individuals, who have no “business” stake in ICANN policy are not adequately taken into account. ICANN continues to be dominated by large business interests and by specific commercial interests involved in providing Internet services...."

IP Justice Report on 2007 Internet Governance Forum (IGF)

By |November 19th, 2007|

Links to Audio, Video, and Photos of IGF-Rio. Where 2007 IGF Excelled: High Quality of Independently Organized Workshops, World-Class Technical Capabilities, Offline Interactions & Networking Opportunities; But: Human Rights & Controversy Avoided, Glaring Lack of Gender Balance & Youth Voices, Last' Year's Speakers ...

Robin Gross’ Remarks at IGF 2007 on Internet Bill of Rights

By |November 13th, 2007|

Today I’d like to address a few issues that are specifically relevant to the positive development of the Internet and a healthy information society. 1. Freedom of Expression Rights. 2. Access to Knowledge Rights. 3. Communication Rights. 4. Privacy Rights and Data Protection. 5. Anonymity. 6. Excessive and unbalanced intellectual property rights. 7. Open Technical Standards. 8. Democratic Values. I cannot emphasize enough that the enforcement of our existing legal rights is the first and most important step we can take to ensure human rights are protected in an information society of the future.....

IP Justice Statement on “GNSO Improvements” at ICANN

By |November 5th, 2007|

ICANN’s Board Governance Committee Report (BGC), in attempting to achieve the laudable result of greater inclusiveness, effectiveness, and efficiency conceives a near total restructuring of the GNSO and its processes. It proceeds from an assumption that any voting inherently inhibits the process and proceeds to find the most dramatic route to eliminate any vote. While many of the BGC Report’s recommendations would certainly improve the effectiveness of the GNSO, the report does not adequately consider the values inherent in the vote of the GNSO Council and the dangers of forcing consensus in all cases....