Re: [wg-b] Creation of Famous List

[KathrynKL@aol.com]

Michael Palage wrote:  
>  Milton if you read the status report that I sent to the Names Counsel you
>  will have found that WG-B has not officially backed the creation of a 
famous
>  marks. However, if you look at the position papers submitted during the
>  comment period you will find that most, NOT all, support the creation of a
>  famous marks list.\

Preface:  I think Michael is doing a good job of working to bring consensus 
to WG-B and that I am very glad that discussion has resumed on the list so 
that all can participate.

That said, I think that making a list of all the position papers and what was 
supported is not the fairest way to evaluate the progress of WG-B -- largely 
because many of the position papers come from the same interest group.  This 
is not simply a scale weighing the entries. 

In the next few weeks, as Michael says, much work needs to be done.  WG-B has 
the hard task of to find a solution that is both consistent with the 
different needs of the Internet community -- and consistent with the 
protections and limitations of trademark law.  The ICANN Board made clear in 
Cairo that it is not looking to set new law.  Whatever WG-B proposes must be 
within that boundary.

It is a hard task, but I think we can do it!

Kathryn Kleiman
(Names Council co-chair to WG-B)



 Additionally, in Cairo the registrars which previously
>  had opposed the creation of a list were willing to back the creation of a
>  famous marks list by WIPO as long as it was used as part of a sunrise 
period
>  and not as part of a filtering mechanism. If you do the math, you will
>  probably find that there is now enough Names Counsel votes to back the
>  creation of a list.
>