<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Dear Brian,<br>
<br>
the Letter of September 14, 2011 indeed gives a direction to "<span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">reserve
those terms most directly associated with the International
Olympic Committee (IOC) and the International Red Cross and Red
Crescent Movement", however the term reserve can be interpreted to
mean many things, one of which I have outlined during our (was it
November last year?) council call.<br>
<br>
I believe the GNSO does have some leeway in their interpretation
of the GAC advice</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:windowtext"><o:p>
which it should use in such a way to best reflect the needs of
all the community and all potential registrants. The extreme
interpretation of the terms as a not-to-be-touched-ever blocking
list would not be such a result, IMHO.<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
<br>
Volker<br>
</o:p></span>
<blockquote
cite="mid:560B87A6C4C20F4999D73431D61B4847082AAC4CE1@SJUSEVS10.steptoe.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:windowtext">Thank
you for these thoughts. Here are some quick responses in
line with your email below.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Best
regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Brian<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u><span style="font-family:Arrow"><o:p><span
style="text-decoration:none"> </span></o:p></span></u></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;color:windowtext">Brian J.
Winterfeldt <o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;color:windowtext">Partner <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:7.0pt"><u><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;color:blue"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:bwinterfeldt@steptoe.com">bwinterfeldt@steptoe.com</a></span></u><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#971B2F"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:1.0pt"><span
style="font-size:20.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#971B2F;letter-spacing:-1.0pt">Steptoe<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif""><br>
------------------------------------------- <br>
<b>From:</b></span> <span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Volker
Greimann[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="SMTP:VGREIMANN@KEY-SYSTEMS.NET">SMTP:VGREIMANN@KEY-SYSTEMS.NET</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b></span> <span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Wednesday,
January 30, 2013 4:02:52 AM <br>
<b>To:</b></span> <span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Winterfeldt,
Brian <br>
<b>Cc:</b></span> <span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif""><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>
<br>
<b>Subject:</b></span> <span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Re:
[council] potential annex to Jeff's draft letter <br>
<b>Auto forwarded by a Rule</b></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Dear Brian,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"
style="margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0
level2 lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-family:"Courier
New","serif""><span style="mso-list:Ignore">o<span
style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span></span><!--[endif]-->The
rather broad scope of the current IGO INGO PDP, which
considers “whether there is a need for special protections
at the top and second level” of all gTLDs, has the practical
effect of second guessing GAC advice with respect to
international legal norms and public policy. In other
words, whether intentional or unintentional, the impact of
the instant PDP is to challenge, or at least question, not
only the GAC’s proposed criteria for protection, but also
the GAC’s determination to advance protection for the
specific two organizations that meet that criteria.<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">Under this scope, the PDP
would not only examine the need for special protections in
new gTLDs but also under the existing ones. One may argue
whether this is necessary or distracting (see the next
point), but I do not see it as directly challenging the GAC
advice.<br>
I personally would have preferred a more direct reference to
the level of protections required. After all, the term
"special protections" is not particularly conclusive as to
what these protections are actually supposed to be, and also
the GAC has been rather opaque on what kind of protections
they envision. It is the duty of the GNSO to fill the GAC
advice with life and I agree that the language describing
the scope of the PDP should have been more clear on that.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:red">I
thought the GAC was fairly clear about its request for
second-level protection in its <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/1540128/GAC+advice+on+IOC+and+Red+Cross+Sep.+2011.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1317031625000"><span
style="color:red">September 14, 2011 letter</span></a>.</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:windowtext">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText" style="margin-left:1.0in"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"
style="margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level2
lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-family:"Courier
New","serif""><span style="mso-list:Ignore">o<span
style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Please
bear in mind that the GAC was careful to propose protections
for Red Cross designations, Olympic words and a finite list of
IGO acronyms <b><i><u>for new gTLDs only</u></i></b>. I
cannot recall anyone ever recommending or requesting such
protection in all existing gTLDs as well. Thus, the Council’s
response to the GAC needs to fully explain any underlying
rationale for the unilateral decision to broaden the scope of
the instant PDP well beyond GAC advice to include existing
gTLDs.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">While I also cannot recall
any such request or recommendation, I fail to see why new
gTLD should be treated differently from existing gTLDs. If
it is determined that a form of special protection is
necessary, why would such a need not also apply to existing
TLDs?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:red">If
that is the reason why the PDP encompasses existing gTLDs,
then it should be added to the response to the GAC. It is
just a guess, but perhaps their proposal was limited to new
gTLDs to avoid overreaching or conflicts with existing
interests in second-level registrations.</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:windowtext">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"
style="margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level2
lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-family:"Courier
New","serif""><span style="mso-list:Ignore">o<span
style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span></span><!--[endif]--> The
Council’s current draft response to the GAC seems to suggest
that the GNSO’s primary remit of policy development relating
to the IOC/Red Cross is “to determine what, if any, exceptions
(i.e. for pre-existing, non-commercial, and/or geographical
use) should apply in the domain name context—particularly at
the second level and in both new and existing TLDs.” If this
is ultimately our position as a Council, then I believe it is
best to gently back away from the current PDP, at least with
respect to the Red Cross designations and Olympic words, in
favor of something much more expeditious and narrow.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">Would it not be the job of
the PDP to make exactly that determination as part of their
deliberations?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:red">If
this is the only issue, or the primary issue, with respect
to these entities, then perhaps something other than a full
PDP was in order, such as a “policy guidance working group”
as suggested in staff’s proposed policy versus
implementation framework.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"
style="margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level2
lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-family:"Courier
New","serif""><span style="mso-list:Ignore">o<span
style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span></span><!--[endif]-->The
proposed definition of “policy” in the letter is overbroad,
subjective and particularly inappropriate in light of the
recent policy versus implementation discussion framework
published by ICANN policy staff. I believe it is better to
simply admit that there is no bright line test and recognize
that this issue is ripe for further discussion within the
ICANN community.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">I would not call it
inappropriate just because there is no clear line in the
sand. </span><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif";color:windowtext"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:red">Perhaps
I am wrong, but I think we can all agree that there is a
strong divergence of opinion within the community on the
definition of “policy.” I thought it best to acknowledge
that in our response to the GAC. In endorsing this letter
as it is written, does everyone intend to endorse Jeff’s
definition of policy?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif""><br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Volker Greimann<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Volker A. Greimann
- Rechtsabteilung -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net">vgreimann@key-systems.net</a>
Web: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.key-systems.net">www.key-systems.net</a> / <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.RRPproxy.net">www.RRPproxy.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.domaindiscount24.com">www.domaindiscount24.com</a> / <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.BrandShelter.com">www.BrandShelter.com</a>
Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems">www.facebook.com/KeySystems</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.twitter.com/key_systems">www.twitter.com/key_systems</a>
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.keydrive.lu">www.keydrive.lu</a>
Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
--------------------------------------------
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Best regards,
Volker A. Greimann
- legal department -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net">vgreimann@key-systems.net</a>
Web: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.key-systems.net">www.key-systems.net</a> / <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.RRPproxy.net">www.RRPproxy.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.domaindiscount24.com">www.domaindiscount24.com</a> / <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.BrandShelter.com">www.BrandShelter.com</a>
Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems">www.facebook.com/KeySystems</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.twitter.com/key_systems">www.twitter.com/key_systems</a>
CEO: Alexander Siffrin
Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.keydrive.lu">www.keydrive.lu</a>
This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
</pre>
</body>
</html>