[governance] .WINE .VIN - who's business is it ?

Fri May 30 09:45:38 EDT 2014

Chris,
Your ability to not understand basic aspects of Internet governance always amazes me.
So my interpretation was and always has been applied to trademarks in ICANN. Domain names are not trademarks, they are character strings that act as globally unique identifiers for a host on the internet. Whether or not domain names clash with trademarks - or geographical indicators - depends on how they are used, NOT on a mechanical string match. Therefore we should have a global, and relatively simple and laissez-faire system of assigning domain names. If there are clashes with TMs, or with GIs, we have the UDRP as a first cut to protect rights, ex post, and if that isn't enough we have national laws that can be applied based on their jurisdiction. In other words, if someone uses a .WINE domain in a way that clashes with established law in any country that has these protectionist laws, action can be taken. You do not need to do it by imposing ex ante restrictions on how a top level domain can be used or to whom it is allocated.

From: CW Mail [mailto:mail at christopherwilkinson.eu]
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 11:01 AM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Milton L Mueller
Subject: Re: [governance] .WINE .VIN - who's business is it ?

Dear Milton:

Just imagine if your interpretation were to be applied to trademarks in ICANN - !
(To be protected only _within their own territory_ )

Christopher

On 28 May 2014, at 21:57, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu<mailto:mueller at syr.edu>> wrote:

Actually the NTIA has it right, Wilkinson is wrong, (and let's leave Crocker and Chehade off of the cc list ;-)
ICANN is a global coordinator; its whole purpose was to avoid having the DNS partitioned into 192 different jurisdictional requirements. If we want 'local' laws to regulate DNS let's eliminate a global root altogether and turn the Internet into the national PTT telephone system. (Oh, it wouldn't be the internet then, would it?)

The EC's idea that it can impose its parochial GI regulations on a global resource is misguided, and an attempt to assert extraterritorial jurisdiction. If they want to enforce their _local_ rules, let them regulate sale or consumption of the TLD registrations _within their own territory_ nothing stops them from doing that, they already have that authority.

The Strickling letter is exactly on target when it asserts that the EC, and certain applicants for .WINE are engaged in special protectionist negotiations and that those negotiations do not have the consensus support of the GAC, much less the rest of the community.

From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto:request at lists.igcaucus.org>] On Behalf Of CW Mail
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2014 12:17 PM
To: IGC LIST
Cc: Steve Crocker; Fadi Chehade
Subject: Re: [governance] .WINE .VIN - who's business is it ?
Importance: High

Good afternoon:

https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/strickling-to-crocker-21may14-en.pdf

Protection of Geographical Indications by ICANN does not depend on " ... GI related obligations in any international legal instrument ... " (c.f. Strickling, para 2)

Rather, it depends on the Articles of Incorporation of ICANN, Article 4:

4. The Corporation shall operate for the benefit of the Internet community as a whole, carrying out its activities in conformity with relevant principles of international law and applicable international conventions and local law and, to the extent appropriate and consistent with these Articles and its Bylaws, through open and transparent processes that enable competition and open entry in Internet-related markets. To this effect, the Corporation shall cooperate as appropriate with relevant international organisations.

That clause was introduced into the ICANN Articles of Incorporation in the 1998-99 negotiations between the White House, Jones Day and the European Commission, precisely to deal with this kind of situation.

Accordingly, whilst it is normal for public authorities, such as NTIA or, for that matter, the European Commission, to write letters to ICANN, on this occasion, and on that point, NTIA has got it wrong.

Regards

Christopher Wilkinson.

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
    governance at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
To be removed from the list, visit:
    http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
    http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
    http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140530/9ad29c75/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t