[bc-gnso] BC Newsletter
pcorwin at butera-andrews.com
Wed Jul 29 14:21:21 UTC 2009
ICA takes strong exception to Mike's commentary (below). We believe that our opposition and that of many others to the URS has been well founded and that the use of the term "ridiculous" to characterize certain opposition to the URS and IP Clearinghouse (and we support the latter, in restricted form) is completely inappropriate. The comment fails to note that some opponents, like us, have called for expedited UDRP reform to put better and balanced protections in place for all parties at all gTLDs, including .com, and it also fails to mention that many parties -including the Chair of the GNSO- have taken the well justified position that the URS is a major policy change and not just an implementation detail that can only be put in place through a UDRP. Instead, the comment implies that ICANN staff and Board have the right to adopt it absent a PDP.
Updates on current issues should strive to be balanced and not biased to fairly represent the diversity of views within the BC and the overall ICANN community and not just the personal view of the individual writing them.
"Unfounded (and sometimes ridiculous) opposition has been raised as to the substance of the IP Clearinghouse and URS proposals -- the comment forum is here: http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-final-report/.
But it is obvious that the UDRP has been entirely ineffective in deterring cybersquatting in the existing TLDs. So, after ten years of the UDRP, it is clear that new methods are needed to deal with this rampant problem. The IP Clearinghouse and URS proposals, in conjunction with one another, would strike a reasonable balance between trademark rights, protection of the public, and protection of domain name registrants.
A series of global outreach events are currently discussing the IRT proposals and the ICANN Board is then expected to take action to incorporate some or all of the proposals into the application guidebook for new TLD applicants."
Philip S. Corwin
Butera & Andrews
1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20004
"Luck is the residue of design." -- Branch Rickey
From: owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [owner-bc-gnso at icann.org] On Behalf Of George Kirikos [icann at leap.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 7:42 AM
To: BC gnso
Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] BC Newsletter
I was surprised to see that the newsletter appears to contain "opinion
pieces", for lack of a better term:
as opposed to strictly information. One-sided statements like:
"Unfounded (and sometimes ridiculous) opposition has been raised as to
the substance of the IP Clearinghouse and URS proposals..."
are inflammatory and one-sided, and should have no place in a
newsletter whose submission criteria was described (two weeks ago) as
being "intended to provide members with summary information on current
There's a large gap between providing "information" and some of the
statements of opinion which infect the newsletter. More care should be
given to edit the newsletter submissions to remove these biased
statements entirely, or to make it clear that they are only the
opinion of the author.
Much of the opposition to the IRT was on a solid foundation, and
indeed ICANN will face great challenges if they attempt to implement
those policies without modification to resolve the well reasoned
concerns of those who made thoughtful comments.
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:19 AM, BC Secretariat<secretariat at bizconst.org> wrote:
> Dear Members
> The latest edition of the BC newsletter is now available at the website:
> Best wishes
More information about the Bc-gnso