[CWG-Stewardship] [client com] IPR Memo

[Seun Ojedeji]

Hi,

I don't think it's about numbers not wanting ICANN to have it(because they
currently have it anyway) but about number's concern on whether ICANN would
refuse to provide access. So the question will be, Whether ICANN can assure
numbers of access to the trademark to clear their concern comfortably.

The numbers currently recognise that ICANN is doing fine, u don't think she
will not be willing to read an assurance from ICANN that the trademark
access will be possible.

That said, if setting up an independent trust will be the acceptable
solution fine let's go ahead. Nevertheless, I think it's just an overkill
IMO.

Regards
On 6 Aug 2015 6:42 pm, "Avri Doria" <avri at acm.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Given that Numbers does not want ICANN to have it, and
> given that the IETF trust is bound to IETF concerns,
> I personally find it difficult to understand how we will come to any
> solution other than the creation of a trust specifically for the IANA
> names and marks.
>
> If Names agrees to this, then we and Numbers will be on the same page.
> Of course while Protocols seems willing to have it in a trust, there is
> no indication of their willingness for it to be in a trust other than
> the one they control. So that may be a hangup.
>
>
> If a trust can be written to make it accountable to each of the 3
> communities with a commitment to do the right thing if one of them
> breaks away from the common IANA, and with 1 rep from each of the
> operational communities designated as the owner of the trust, woud it be
> possible to cut this knot?
>
> avri
>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
> _______________________________________________
> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150806/8b40ee4e/attachment.html>