<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi Marika,<br>
<br>
thank you for that clarification. While this relieves part of my
concern, I still feel that "baking" a single constituency into
such a process and handing out special benefits is not the proper
procedure for a multi-stakeholder organization, even if it is an
opt-in process for the applicant.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Volker<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:CE6FC202.2A246%25marika.konings@icann.org"
type="cite">
<div>Dear All,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Please find below a response from Cyrus Namazi in relation to
the paragraph referred to by Volker.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best regards,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Marika</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div><font face="Times"><i>In response to community input, the
TMCH Requirements were revised to allow registry operators
the ability to submit applications to conduct launch
programs. In response to the large number of Geo TLDs who
voiced similar concerns, the IPC publicly stated that it
would be willing to work with Geo TLDs to develop mutually
acceptable language for Geo TLD launch programs. We
viewed this proposal as a way for community members to
work collectively to propose to ICANN a possible solution
for an issue specifically affecting intellectual property
rights-holders and Geo TLDs. Any such proposal will be
subject to ICANN's review and ICANN has expressly stated
that any such proposal may be subject to public comment in
which other interested community members may participate.
This is captured in Section 4.5.3.</i></font></div>
<div><font face="Times"><i><br>
</i></font></div>
<div><font face="Times"><i><font>As an alternative, applicants
can unilaterally apply for a program exemption under
another provision of the requirements (Section 4.5.2).
IPC was added to facilitate the discussion; not a
condition to that requirement.</font> </i></font></div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION">
<div style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:11pt;
text-align:left; color:black; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none;
BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT:
0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid;
BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt"><span
style="font-weight:bold">From: </span> Volker Greimann <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:vgreimann@key-Systems.net">vgreimann@key-Systems.net</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span> Monday 30
September 2013 19:03<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span> Glen de Saint Géry
<<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Glen@icann.org">Glen@icann.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Cc: </span> "<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>"
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span> [council]
TMCH RPM Requirements draft document<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Dear fellow councillors,<br>
<br>
in the last week ICANN has released a final draft version
of the TMCH RPM Requirements, which contains in section
4.5.3 a paragraph that I find to be questionable:<br>
<br>
<h1 class="western" style="widows: 8; page-break-after:
auto" align="JUSTIFY"><font color="#0000ff"><font
size="3"><u><span style="font-weight: normal">4.5.3</span></u></font></font><font
size="3"><span style="font-weight: normal"></span></font><font
color="#0000ff"><font size="3"><u><span
style="font-weight: normal">If registry
operators that indicated in their applications
for their TLDs that their TLD would be a
geographic name (“</span></u></font></font><font
color="#0000ff"><font size="3"><u>Geo TLDs</u></font></font><font
color="#0000ff"><font size="3"><u><span
style="font-weight: normal">”)
<i>and representatives of the Intellectual
Property Constituency</i> recommend to ICANN
the creation of a registration program (...)<br>
</span></u></font></font></h1>
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="OpenOffice 4.0.0 (Win32)">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 2cm }
H1.western { font-family: "Cambria"; font-size: 16pt }
H1.cjk { font-family: "Lucida Sans Unicode"; font-size: 16pt }
H1.ctl { font-family: "Cambria"; font-size: 16pt }
--</style><br>
Apparently, ICANN staff is considering to give one
constituency special consideration. While the subject at
hand is probably closest to the specific interests of that
one constituency, giving any one constituency or any part
thereof an effective veto over a subject matter that still
has relevance to the other constituencies and stakeholder
groups is highly problematic and contrary to the spirit of
the multi-stakeholder principle. ICANN staff should
consider all stakeholders equally and not cater to a
single stakeholder group. It would be different if such a
recommendation came from the GNSO council itself.<br>
<br>
</div>
Further, stakeholder groups and constituencies may change
over time, so referencing one in such a process description
may cause problems down the line.<br>
<br>
I feel this topic needs to be raised on the council level as
this is only the most recent example of ICANN staff acting
unilaterally in favoring one interest over others. <br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Best regards,
Volker Greimann
</pre>
</div>
</div>
-->
</span>
</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: vgreimann@key-systems.net
Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com
Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems
www.twitter.com/key_systems
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
www.keydrive.lu
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: vgreimann@key-systems.net
Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com
Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems
www.twitter.com/key_systems
CEO: Alexander Siffrin
Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
www.keydrive.lu
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>