Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-hk - Re: [Cc-hk] [berkmanfriends] ICANN, new top-level domains, and trademark issues

cc-hk AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Cc-hk mailing list

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Rebecca MacKinnon <rebecca.mackinnon AT gmail.com>
  • To: Samuel Klein <meta.sj AT gmail.com>
  • Cc: cc-hk <cc-hk AT lists.ibiblio.org>, Berkman Friends <berkmanfriends AT eon.law.harvard.edu>
  • Subject: Re: [Cc-hk] [berkmanfriends] ICANN, new top-level domains, and trademark issues
  • Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2009 08:49:47 +0100

Exactly. Makes no sense.

Sent from my iPhone
UK: +44-7759-863406
USA: +1-617-939-3493
HK: +852-6334-8843

On Jul 11, 2009, at 7:18 AM, Samuel Klein <meta.sj AT gmail.com> wrote:

I'm so confused by the domain-trademark problems.

Why aren't domain names covered by standard trademark law like any
other entity-formation? we don't need ICANN rules to keep me from
starting a Starbucks Inc cafepress store, or creating a "red cross"
foundation that sells red crosses to raise money for pandas. why is
domain squatting treated so baroquely?

S

On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 4:31 AM, Rebecca
MacKinnon<rebecca.mackinnon AT gmail.com> wrote:
Hi everybody.
As some of you know, next year ICANN plans to allow applications from
anybody who wants to run a new top-level domain (the part of the URL after
the dot), in any language. This has opened up a big argument over trademarks
among other things.

A set of recommendations for how to handle trademark disputes has been
issued by an Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT) from ICANN's
Intellectual Property Constituency. It has been up for download and public
comment here:
http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-4-29may09-en.htm

One critique of the IRT report highlighting free speech concerns is here:
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090621_mahmoud_ahmadinejad_globally_protected_marks_list_gpml/

The Non-Commercial Users' Constituency within ICANN strongly objects to
these recommendations. In their formal comment paper objecting to the
subtance of the IRT report, they state:

"the substantive IRT recommendations take ICANN far afield of its technical
scope and mission, create substantive new trademark rights (beyond existing
law), gut existing safeguards and fair procedures for domain name
registrants in the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (“UDRP”), and create an
unbounded situation for abuse by trademark lawyers and those representing
trademark owners."

The full objection paper is here:
http://icann-ncuc.ning.com/profiles/blogs/ncucs-substantive-comments-on

Other public comments are here:
http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-final-report/

Public consultations will be held in New York and London next week, then in
Hong Kong the following week. The NCUC encourages people with concerns can
show up in person to voice them.

THE DEADLINE TO REGISTER FOR THE NYC AND LONDON MEETINGS IS TODAY (Friday).
The deadline for Hong Kong is next week. For more information and to sign up
go here:
http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/consultation-outreach-en.htm

Best,
Rebecca


--
Rebecca MacKinnon
Open Society Fellow | Co-founder, GlobalVoicesOnline.org
Assistant Professor, Journalism & Media Studies Centre, University of Hong
Kong

UK: +44-7759-863406
USA: +1-617-939-3493
HK: +852-6334-8843
Mainland China: +86-13710820364

E-mail: rebecca.mackinnon AT gmail.com
Blog: http://RConversation.blogs.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rmack
Friendfeed: http://friendfeed.com/rebeccamack

----------
You are subscribed to the Berkman Fellows and Friends discussion list.

Mailing list options: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/lists/info/berkmanfriends
Mailing list members:
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/lists/review/berkmanfriends

Please mind that emails sent through this list are considered public unless
otherwise noted.







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page