Legal Briefing Paper from Law Professor Christine Haight Farley on GNSO Recommendations for Domain Name Policy

By |June 6th, 2007|

Before I make observations specific to these recommendations, I would like to offer some general remarks about the overall incongruence between trademarks and domain names. It is important to note at the outset this general lack of equivalence between trademark law and domain name policy. For instance, trademark law the world over is fundamentally based on the concept of territoriality. Thus trademark law seeks to protect regionally and market-based marks without implication for the protection or availability of that mark in another region. In contrast, domain names have global reach, are accessible everywhere and have implications for speech around the world. ...

Legal Briefing Paper from Law Professor Jacqueline Lipton on GNSO Recommendations for Domain Name Policy

By |June 6th, 2007|

"... It is important to start re-focusing the regulation of the Internet domain name system generally on interests outside of pure trademark interests. The introduction of new gTLDs and the development of processes for introducing them may provide a good opportunity for achieving this goal. However, any attempt to regulate broad policy issues relating to social and cultural norms on speech, public order and morality in domain names will be very difficult for any national or international body or group. ICANN also faces the practical difficulty that its major area of expertise is technical and functional. It is therefore important for ICANN to clarify what groups, bodies or individuals it might utilize in carrying out future legal and social developments within development of its domain name processes. In particular, ICANN should consider more specifically who to consult in formalizing specific processes for: (a) the introduction of new gTLD strings; (b) establishing dispute resolution procedures for those strings; and, (c) deciding whether the introduction of particular new strings should be deferred or rejected...."

GNSO New TLDs Committee Draft Final Report -Introduction of Generic Top Level Domains

By |March 16th, 2007|

... The section sets out the principles, policy recommendations and implementation guidelines the GNSO Council’s Committee on the introduction of new top-level domains has developed through its policy development process. The development of all elements of the Committee’s work has been done in close consultation with an ICANN staff team who have provided advice on policy, operational and legal matters for the Committee. ... Recommendation 6 - Strings must not be contrary to generally accepted legal norms relating to morality and public order.

NCUC Minority Report on GNSO New gTLD Policy Proposal

By |March 14th, 2007|

NCUC Minority Report

I wish to supplement the work of the Committee by adding these comments.

It is my view that any general Principle which seeks to prohibit any gTLD promoting hatred, racism, discrimination, crime or any abuse of religions or cultures is fundamentally flawed insofar as it fails to include any reference to Freedom of Expression.

GACs […]

GNSO new TLDs Committee Draft Final Report on the Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains (gTLDs)

By |February 13th, 2007|

NCUC Comments on GNSO WhoIs Task Force Preliminary Report

By |January 15th, 2007|

The Noncommercial Users Constituency (NCUC) believes that ICANN policies governing the publication of Whois data must be reformed, and quickly. The Operational Point of Contact Proposal ("OPoC Proposal") presented in this Whois Task Force Report is not perfect, but it is the only way to bring some consensus and closure to a problem that has festered for too long. ....

Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) Comments on LSE Report on GNSO Reform

By |December 22nd, 2006|

ICANN’s Non-Commercial User Constituency (NCUC) welcomes the London School of Economics (LSE) report on the GNSO and urges the Board to implement many, but not all, of its recommendations. ... The existing [GNSO] structure gives business, particularly entertainment companies or other intellectual property interests, too much power in GNSO policy making and an unfair advantage. Non-commercial interests should be given equal weight to commercial interests in GNSO policy making as a matter of principle. ...

IP Justice Comments on 2006 London School of Economics Report to Improve the GNSO

By |October 19th, 2006|

"Many of the proposals in the 2006 LSE Report to reform the GNSO are good - for example, standardized term limits for GNSO Council Members, reducing the number of constituencies from 6 to 3 -- and consolidating the business, intellectual property rights lobby, and internet service providers all in a single "commercial" constituency. This would be an improvement because currently many of the same companies dominate more than one constituency, so are given much greater power within ICANN than other constituencies. For example, companies like Disney, News Corp, and the International Chamber of Commerce dominate both the IPR and business constutiences - giving their interests double weight on ICANN's GNSO Policy Council. ..."

London School of Economics Report on GNSO Reform (16 Sept. 2006)

By |September 15th, 2006|

NCUC Contribution to IGF on ICANN Whois Privacy Issue

By |August 2nd, 2006|

Contribution Memorandum: Privacy Implications of WHOIS Database Policy
Submitted to the Secretariat of the Internet Governance Forum by the ICANN Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) For IGF Greece 2006, Athens, 30 October – 2 November, 2006
The Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) is the part of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) that represents the interests […]