[CCWG-ACCT] Board comments on the Mission statement

[Bruce Tonkin]

Hello David,


>>  The UDRP is a good example of how this line works, for me.  ICANN does have the power to set up a process to resolve disputes over domain names, because the outcomes of those disputes necessarily and inherently affect the content of the DNS databases directly.  ICANN does not have the power to set up a process to resolve disputes over consumer fraud complaints, because the outcomes of those disputes do not affect the content of the DNS databases.

That sounds reasonable - although the decisions of UDPR do relate to how the domain name is used, which inevitably involves considering the content of websites or emails that make use of that domain name.   e.g. using "apple" as an example.  I can have a domain name like "apple.expert" that refers to an expert on the topic of Apples as a fruit - but couldn't use that domain name without approval for being an expert on Apple computers.

So the dispute does relate to the domain name, but resolving that dispute requires an understanding of how that name is used.

A counter example Is suppose could be a name like "computer.expert".   A website referenced by that domain name could potentially use trademarks of Apple, but that would be a dispute about the content of that site, and not the domain name.  The main requirement would be that the contact information for the domain name is accurate, so that Apple could take the appropriate legal action.

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin








David




*******************************
David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America Foundation
blog (Volokh Conspiracy) http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post
book (Jefferson's Moose)  http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n
music http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic  publications 
etc.  http://www.davidpost.com
*******************************