[council] GNSO Council letter to the GAC

Tue May 12 22:22:36 UTC 2009

Hi Stephane,

Sure.

1.  If I am expected to support the letter as a member of Council, I have an obligation to consult substantively with, at a minimum, the leadership of the IPC.  I have not had the opportunity to do that and will not before the 48-hour deadline (or, for that matter, until after May 20).  

2.  It is difficult to maintain the position that governments should be treated as any other objector.  As a practical matter, issues of sovereignty and more, specifically, national law may effectively preclude governments from participating in the objection process.

3.  The IRT has proposed a Globally Protected Marks List.  It's not a reserved names list and would not be free to trdemark owners.  Nonetheless, I can't support the current textual reference to the GAC's  proposal.

4.  The IRT is discussing and/or has proposed other mechanisms for which my support of this letter would be inconsistent with my clear support of the IRT proposals.

Given point 1 above, it is unlikely that any further changes to the letter would result in my supporting it.  I have no objection to the letter noting that I have abstained.  That would allow the letter to be submitted and still note that I have  not supported it.  It seems like a good compromise to me.

K 

________________________________

	From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder at indom.com] 
	Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 5:59 PM
	To: Rosette, Kristina; Council GNSO
	Subject: Re: [council] GNSO Council letter to the GAC

	Hi Kristina,

	Considering the number of positive reactions received so far, it would be nice to know what in the letter is causing you to object.

	Depending on the nature of the objections, it may be that I can then propose some edits which despite the time constraints you are under with the IRT, you may be able to agree on.

	Let me know if that helps.

	Thanks,

	Stéphane

	Le 12/05/09 23:40, « Rosette, Kristina » <krosette at cov.com> a écrit :

		I can't support this letter.  Because I am in the middle of the IRT's 3-day F2F, I am not in a position to propose revised language.  Given these contraints, it would be OK with me if the Council nonetheless wanted to send the letter and note in it that I have abstained.

________________________________

		From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
		Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 10:06 AM
		To: Council GNSO
		Subject: Re: [council] GNSO Council letter to the GAC

			Following on, for clarity here is the draft modified  to take Edmon's comments into account.

			Stéphane

			Le 12/05/09  15:51, « Stéphane Van Gelder » <stephane.vangelder at indom.com> a  écrit :

				Edmon,

				Ì think that is a very useful  suggestion, thank you. As the clock is running, I am copying this to the  Council list.

				I am fine with you edit and will amend the draft  accordingly unless anyone  objects.

				Thanks,

				Stéphane

				Le 12/05/09 12:25,  « Edmon Chung » <edmon at registry.asia> a  écrit :

					sorry for the late response... I do see that the  48 hr clock started clicking so did not want to send this to the council  list unless you feel comfortable about it...

					you had:  "  No such  restrictions are imposed on existing gTLD registries and we feel it would  be
					inappropriate to attempt to use the new gTLD program to introduce  new contractual
					obligations previously not requested or deemed  necessary."

					I don't think that is entirely true... in our  contract and in all the ones in the s round, there is a  clause:
					" All geographic and geopolitical names contained in  the ISO 3166-1 list from time to time shall initially be reserved at both  the second level and at all other levels within the TLD at which the  Registry Operator provides for registrations. All names shall be reserved  both in English and in all related official languages as may be directed  by ICANN or the GAC."

					What this effectively means is that  registries have had to use the other ISO lists previously already to  produce the  "reserved both in English and in all related official  languages" part.

					Then of course there is the other part in  the agreement that says:
					"In addition, Registry Operator shall reserve  names of territories, distinct geographic locations, and other geographic  and geopolitical names as ICANN may direct from time to  time."

					Would like to suggest edits as  follows:

					Restrictions are already imposed on existing gTLD  registries in this regard, especially with regards to those adopted for  the sTLD round of gTLDs.  We feel that current contractual  obligations are already appropriate and new contractual obligations maybe  unnecessary.

					Edmon

					From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org]  On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
					Sent: Tuesday, May 12,  2009 4:12 PM
					To: Council GNSO
					Subject: [council] GNSO  Council letter to the GAC

					Dear  all,

					In a letter dated April 24 2009, GAC Chair Janis Karklins  wrote to ICANN CEO Paul Twomey on the subject of geographical names and  the new gTLD process.

					At our Council meeting last week, it was  decided that we should respond to this letter and I volunteered to write a  draft. We agreed that our response should be sent to the GAC asap,  preferably by the end of this week, and Avri informed the GAC that they  should expect a response from the GNSO Council by this Friday.

					In  order to fine-tune our draft response, a team was set up and I submitted  my draft to the team yesterday.

					The team responded very quickly in  order to meet the Council's Friday deadline and considered my draft "good  to go", with one addition by David Maher and a comment by Avri, both of  which have been included in the draft letter we are submitting to the full  Council today (see attached).

					Could you please review and let me  know of any further changes you would like to make, or of your approval,  so that Avri may then send the finished letter to the GAC on  Friday.

					My thanks to the members of the drafting team: David Maher  - Avri Doria - Nacho Amadoz - Edmon Chung - Brian Cute - Ken Stubbs - Olga  Cavalli  - Tony Harris - Terry Davis - William  Drake.

					Best,

					Stéphane Van Gelder  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20090512/f07a4052/attachment.html>