[cc-humanrights] infographic ICANN & Human Rights v0.3 pls comment

[Bastiaan Goslings]

Hi,

I have been in listening mode but want to chime in and first of all complement everyone with the work done and the excellent chart that has been drafted. Significant improvements IMO have been made since v.01, and for now I have no comments how to make it even better.

As a non-HR scholar I struggle to see how trademarks per se infringe upon human rights. Specifically in this context. I do appreciate the concept of a ‘naive right of the people to the linguistic commons’, as Avri put it, but I too ‘am not sure how that roots into the UDHR derived rights’. From a freedom of expression angle I’d assume that ex ante anything goes in terms of registering a domain name (e.g. by an individual or SME). But if a trademark is involved a legal conflict might arise afterwards, just like in the offline world, and there is (should be?) due process to solve the issue. And then the trademark might prevail… 


> On 01 Jun 2016, at 20:32, Kathy Kleiman <Kathy at kathykleiman.com> wrote:
> 
> - Without this Right to Basic Dictionary words, what access would entrepreneurs and small businesses have to domain names with the basic words used to name their current and future products, services and companies? 


Without knowing what a ‘Right to Basic Dictionary words’ is or what it could be, and my apologies for my potential lack of knowledge re ICANN policies and related history:

Domain-names are unique and there is a ‘first come first serve’ element involved when registering one. So if it is already registered by someone else one cannot have the ‘right' to the same domain-name. I understand there is a UDRP to resolve claims of abusive, bad faith domain name registration, albeit only for gTLD’s operated under contract with ICANN. Does that not imply that if the registration is not ‘abusive’ or in ‘bad faith’ that the trademark does not supersede the original registration?  


> - Without this Right to Basic Dictionary words, what access would individuals have to domain names for their children or using their last name? 


This I do not understand. At the moment this so called ‘Right’ does not exist, but as long as names are unique ‘individuals have access to domain names for their children or using their last name’, right?


> - Without this Right to Basic Dictionary words, what access would and noncommercial organizations have to use domain names that open to sites that fairly and legally critique and criticize dangerous products, unfair employment practices or monopoly restrictions (and legally use the brand name of the company)? 


I doubt whether it is up to ICANN to see to it that ‘non commercial organizations’ can indeed ‘fairly and legally critique and criticize dangerous products, unfair employment practices or monopoly restrictions’. But my right, at least in the Netherlands, to freedom of expression and in this case to ‘legally critique’ etc, is not dependent on the domain-name I use. 

regards
Bastiaan