DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [registrars] Fw: [council] GAC and country name reservations

Hi Rick,
I don't think the GAC has got what they want on this yet.  But they almost
certainly will -  unless the DNSO objects.
You may recall that WIPO has had a couple of rounds of consultation on the
need to extend the UDRP to cover IP rights in place names and personal names
following requests from governments.
The NC is increasingly concerned about this issue and is now actively
seeking   the views of the constituencies so that it can determine whether a
DNSO consensus view can be put to the Board.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick H Wesson" <wessorh@ar.com>
To: "erica" <erica.roberts@bigpond.com>
Cc: "Registrars@Dnso.Org" <registrars@dnso.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 10:04 PM
Subject: Re: [registrars] Fw: [council] GAC and country name reservations


why is it the GAC gets what they want without confering with the NC or any
other entity except the board. This action points to just another reason
we need to evaluate the structure of ICANN.


On Thu, 27 Sep 2001, erica wrote:

> I draw the attention of Registrars to the recent GAC Communique which
recomends that the names of countries and distinct ecnomies should be
reserved in any new gTLDs and warns that the registration of such names may
be subject to dispute.  This warning picks up issues being canvassed under
the WIPO process - partiularly the concern by many governments that they
should be recognised a having intellectual propery rights in
political/geographical names.
> Many governments are signatory to a treaty (or similar agreement) under
which they recognise appellation rights in relation to other industries.
While I am not fully across this, I do know that this has significantly
impacted on the wine industry - so that only wines made from grapes grown in
the French Champaigne area can be called "champaigne", ditto "burgundy" etc.
This had a big impact on the wine industry world wide and established a
prededent which gives governments some form of IP rights in place names.
> As I see it,  this is primarily an issue for Registries who are being
asked to reserve the relevant names.  However, in the absence of any defined
list of relevant names (such as the two letter country codes on the the ISO
3166-1 list) there is scope for confusion and dispute - which has the
potential to impact on Registrar business.
> The NC is taking this issue under consideration and solicits comment from
the Registrar constituency.
> erica
> From: Philip Sheppard
> To: NC (list)
> Sent: 24 September 2001 16:56
> Subject: [council] GAC and country name reservations
> In a communiqué made by the Government Advisory Council at its Montevideo
meeting http://www.icann.org/committees/gac/communique-09sep01.htm "the GAC
recommends that the names of countries and distinct economies, particularly
those contained in the ISO 3166-1 standard, as applied by ICANN in
identifying ccTLDs, should be reserved by the .info Registry, (or if
registered in the Sunrise Period challenged by the Registry and, if
successful, then reserved) in Latin characters in their official language(s)
and in English and assigned to the corresponding governments and public
authorities, at their request, for use. These names in other IDN character
sets should be reserved in the same way as soon as they become available"
> In the same communiqué the GAC further "draws the attention of ICANN and
the Registries to the fact that a large number of other names, including
administrative sub-divisions of countries and distinct economies as
recognised in international fora, may give rise to contested registrations.
Accordingly the GAC recommends that Registrars and eventual Registrants
should be made aware of this".
> ---------------------------------------
> I believe that the NC should issue a statement about this and ask you to
consult in your constituencies rapidly. I currently propose that we could
> - urging caution on the GAC in taking this step,
> - point out that dot info is but the start of a TLD expansion and
something much more interesting for countries could be possible
> - propose that WIPO is the best place for discussion on geographical
> Comments please.
> Philip
> NC Chair

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>