<div dir="ltr">+1 George<div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="m_3303800122463450602gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><font color="#000000" face="Arial"><span style="font-size:13.63636302948px">Sincerely,</span></font></div><div dir="ltr"><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><font><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000F8" style="font-size:10pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">Jay Chapman</span></font></font></font></span></span></span></span></span></div></div></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 9:27 AM, George Kirikos <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:icann@leap.com" target="_blank">icann@leap.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thanks to Petter too, who is on that mailing list as well (in my first<br>
pass through the archives, I had forgotten his posts of Feb 2017). My<br>
apologies for the unintended oversight. As I noted in the earlier<br>
email, I hadn't read the transcripts or listened to the audio<br>
recordings, but I'm confident that *both* our co-chairs are doing an<br>
excellent (and mostly thankless!) job representing our PDP's work.<br>
Thank you.<br>
<br>
Have a great weekend, everyone.<br>
<span class="m_3303800122463450602im m_3303800122463450602HOEnZb"><br>
Sincerely,<br>
<br>
George Kirikos<br>
<a href="tel:416-588-0269" value="+14165880269" target="_blank">416-588-0269</a><br>
<a href="http://www.leap.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.leap.com/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</span><div class="m_3303800122463450602HOEnZb"><div class="m_3303800122463450602h5">On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 10:17 AM, Phil Corwin <<a href="mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com" target="_blank">psc@vlaw-dc.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> " Our own Phil Corwin is on that mailing list, and doing an excellent<br>
> job in my opinion of representing our work to date".<br>
><br>
> Thanks for the shout out, George.<br>
><br>
> Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal<br>
> Virtualaw LLC<br>
> 1155 F Street, NW<br>
> Suite 1050<br>
> Washington, DC 20004<br>
> <a href="tel:202-559-8597" value="+12025598597" target="_blank">202-559-8597</a>/Direct<br>
> <a href="tel:202-559-8750" value="+12025598750" target="_blank">202-559-8750</a>/Fax<br>
> <a href="tel:202-255-6172" value="+12022556172" target="_blank">202-255-6172</a>/Cell<br>
><br>
> Twitter: @VlawDC<br>
><br>
> "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey<br>
><br>
><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: <a href="mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces@ican<wbr>n.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-igo-ingo-crp-boun<wbr>ces@icann.org</a>] On Behalf Of Novoa, Osvaldo<br>
> Sent: Friday, April 28, 2017 9:58 AM<br>
> To: 'Paul Keating'; George Kirikos<br>
> Cc: <a href="mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org</a><br>
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Issues raised by Small discussion group concerning IGO and Red Cross identifiers<br>
><br>
> +1<br>
> Excellent Work!!!<br>
> And most useful for our analysis.<br>
> Thank you and best regards,<br>
> Osvaldo Novoa<br>
><br>
> -----Mensaje original-----<br>
> De: <a href="mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces@ican<wbr>n.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-igo-ingo-crp-boun<wbr>ces@icann.org</a>] En nombre de Paul Keating Enviado el: viernes, 28 de abril de 2017 03:01 a.m.<br>
> Para: George Kirikos<br>
> CC: <a href="mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org</a><br>
> Asunto: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Issues raised by Small discussion group concerning IGO and Red Cross identifiers<br>
><br>
> George<br>
><br>
> Well done. I am amazed at your dedication although I often honestly wonder where you get the time.<br>
><br>
> Thank you for your comments tinier contributions.<br>
><br>
> Sincerely,<br>
> Paul Keating, Esq.<br>
><br>
>> On Apr 28, 2017, at 3:10 AM, George Kirikos <<a href="mailto:icann@leap.com" target="_blank">icann@leap.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Hi folks,<br>
>><br>
>> During today's call, reference was made to the Small discussion group<br>
>> concerning IGO and Red Cross identifiers, whose mailing list archives<br>
>> can be visited via:<br>
>><br>
>> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion-igo-rc" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/l<wbr>istinfo/discussion-igo-rc</a><br>
>> <a href="http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/discussion-igo-rc/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/<wbr>discussion-igo-rc/</a><br>
>><br>
>> Our own Phil Corwin is on that mailing list, and doing an excellent<br>
>> job in my opinion of representing our work to date.<br>
>><br>
>> I've been going through the archives, and have some comments/thoughts below:<br>
>><br>
>> 1. in the post at:<br>
>> <a href="http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/discussion-igo-rc/2017-March/000116.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/<wbr>discussion-igo-rc/2017-March/0<wbr>00116.html</a><br>
>> the OECD rep made bold and overbroad assertions about the nature of<br>
>> IGO protections in national legislation, stating:<br>
>><br>
>> "Canada's legislation in this regard extends beyond simple refusal to<br>
>> register a conflicting trademark: §9(1) of the Trade-marks Act states<br>
>> that "No person shall adopt in connection with a business, as a<br>
>> trade-mark or otherwise, any mark..."<br>
>><br>
>> That's a highly misleading statement/snippet, perhaps assuming that no<br>
>> one would actually look up the full text of the Canadian legislation.<br>
>> I did. It's at:<br>
>><br>
>> <a href="http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/t-13/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca<wbr>/eng/acts/t-13/</a><br>
>> <a href="http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/t-13/page-2.html#h-3" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca<wbr>/eng/acts/t-13/page-2.html#h-3</a><br>
>><br>
>> and it makes clear via explicit language that there are excepted uses:<br>
>><br>
>> 9(2) Excepted uses<br>
>><br>
>> (2) Nothing in this section prevents the adoption, use or registration<br>
>> as a trade-mark or otherwise, in connection with a business, of any<br>
>> mark .....<br>
>> (ii) an armorial bearing, flag, emblem or abbreviation mentioned in<br>
>> paragraph (1)(i.3), *****unless the use of the mark is likely to<br>
>> mislead the public as to a connection between the user and the<br>
>> organization.*****<br>
>><br>
>> (emphasis added)<br>
>><br>
>> And section 9(1)(i.3) was (on the same page) referencing IGOs and Article 6ter:<br>
>><br>
>> "(i.3) any armorial bearing, flag or other emblem, or the name or any<br>
>> abbreviation of the name, of an international intergovernmental<br>
>> organization, if the armorial bearing, flag, emblem, name or<br>
>> abbreviation is on a list communicated under article 6ter of the<br>
>> Convention or pursuant to the obligations under the Agreement on<br>
>> Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights set out in Annex<br>
>> 1C to the WTO Agreement stemming from that article, and the Registrar<br>
>> gives public notice of the communication;"<br>
>><br>
>> So, it's clear that that the "Excepted uses" in Canada law recognizes<br>
>> coexistence explicitly, mirroring the language of Article 6ter section<br>
>> 1(c) which made the recognition of coexistence via exceptions for:<br>
>><br>
>> "when the use or registration referred to in subparagraph (a), above,<br>
>> is not of such a nature as to suggest to the public that a connection<br>
>> exists between the organization concerned and the armorial bearings,<br>
>> flags, emblems, abbreviations, and names, or if such use or<br>
>> registration is probably not of such a nature as to mislead the public<br>
>> as to the existence of a connection between the user and the<br>
>> organization."<br>
>><br>
>> and which is reflected in our own group's recommendations (which the<br>
>> IGOs did not like, as they seem to ignore section 1(c) of Article 6ter<br>
>> repeatedly).<br>
>><br>
>> So, I hope this is brought to the attention of the "Small discussion<br>
>> group", to ensure that they're not making incorrect assessments of the<br>
>> nature of the IGO protections based on misleading statements from the<br>
>> IGOs.<br>
>><br>
>> 2. In the post at:<br>
>><br>
>> <a href="http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/discussion-igo-rc/2017-April/000132.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/<wbr>discussion-igo-rc/2017-April/0<wbr>00132.html</a><br>
>><br>
>> where, as we discussed today during the call, Bruce Tonkin proposed<br>
>> asking for external legal advice regard relevant national laws in<br>
>> relation to IGO protection, "before being able to design a new dispute<br>
>> resolution process." I am confident that at least in Canada and the<br>
>> USA, that no such national laws limit the due process rights of those<br>
>> accused of misusing the IGO marks --- the accused would still "get to<br>
>> have their day in court."<br>
>><br>
>> In the past, we discussed the possibility of allowing representatives<br>
>> of national authorities to bring the UDRP/URS actions (instead of the<br>
>> IGOs themselves), as a way forward. Perhaps this should be revisited,<br>
>> to handle the immunity issue once and for all. National authorities<br>
>> would obviously face no question of immunity before their own courts<br>
>> (except perhaps those in totalitarian regimes where due process<br>
>> doesn't exist). If a Canadian entity is accused of misuse of an IGO by<br>
>> a Canadian national authority in a UDRP/URS, a decision could be<br>
>> appealed by either side to the relevant Canadian courts, leaving the<br>
>> IGO out of the process and shielded from the immunity issue.<br>
>><br>
>> Bruce Tonkin might be sympathetic to that possibility, when he<br>
>> mentioned in a later post at:<br>
>><br>
>> <a href="http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/discussion-igo-rc/2017-April/000147.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/<wbr>discussion-igo-rc/2017-April/0<wbr>00147.html</a><br>
>><br>
>> "a Government on their behalf"<br>
>><br>
>> can act to protect IGOs via the laws of their jurisdictions. He also wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> " I am assuming that it is in the "public interest" for an IGO or<br>
>> Government to take some action to stop the mis-use - just trying to be<br>
>> clear "how" that would be done."<br>
>><br>
>> If, in the public interest, we explicitly allow governments or<br>
>> national authorities to bring the UDRP/URS, as "agents" of the IGO,<br>
>> this would appear to solve many issues. We already issued policy<br>
>> guidance about "assignees, licensees and agents", so perhaps we could<br>
>> be more explicit in our report about permitting national authorities<br>
>> to be the agents of the IGOs, as part of our "workaround"?? [Of<br>
>> course, the national authorities don't have to use the UDRP/URS at<br>
>> all, they could just go directly to their courts using existing<br>
>> judicial mechanisms.]<br>
>><br>
>> Any ICANN-developed process *needs* to ensure that full due process<br>
>> for domain name registrants (including via access to the courts) is<br>
>> not eliminated, otherwise ICANN would be making up new law, beyond<br>
>> what exists in national laws.<br>
>><br>
>> 3. The rep from WIPO stated at:<br>
>> <a href="http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/discussion-igo-rc/2017-April/000134.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/<wbr>discussion-igo-rc/2017-April/0<wbr>00134.html</a><br>
>><br>
>> "Standing for IGOs which need not be expressly grounded in trademark<br>
>> law as such, as IGOs are created by governments under international<br>
>> law and are in an objectively different category of rights holders."<br>
>><br>
>> which is an odd statement, given that the OECD rep previously pointed<br>
>> explicitly at Canada's Trademark Act! While other nation's laws<br>
>> differ, we should not be creating new DRPs for every possible event of<br>
>> fraud or misuse of the DNS --- that's what the national courts are<br>
>> there for.<br>
>><br>
>> When Barclays plead guilty of manipulating FX rates:<br>
>><br>
>> <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150520_should_barclays_lose_the_barcla" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.circleid.com/posts/<wbr>20150520_should_barclays_lose_<wbr>the_barcla</a><br>
>> ys_top_level_domain/<br>
>><br>
>> the national authorities didn't seek "relief" for that disgusting and<br>
>> illegal behaviour via the UDRP or some other DRP created by ICANN, or<br>
>> argue that ICANN should create a new DRP for FX manipulation. There<br>
>> has been talk about creating a "Copyright" version of the UDRP, for<br>
>> example, or other DRPs. ICANN should not be wasting limited volunteer<br>
>> resources and time via mission creep, trying to replace or supercede<br>
>> the national laws of 200+ members. At least with the UDRP/URS, there<br>
>> was a strong "lowest common denominator" amongst those national<br>
>> trademark laws, which are reflected in the policies, and the policies<br>
>> directly permit court action at any time, either before, during or<br>
>> after a panel decision. It's clear that the IGOs want to eliminate<br>
>> those due process protections of the courts, by compelling<br>
>> arbitration, by revisiting issues that have been looked at for nearly<br>
>> 20 years (and repeatedly rejected by the community).<br>
>><br>
>> 4. As I've noted in the past (and noted in my comments on our draft<br>
>> report)<br>
>><br>
>> <a href="https://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-igo-ingo-crp-access-initial-20j" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://forum.icann.org/lists/<wbr>comments-igo-ingo-crp-access-i<wbr>nitial-20j</a><br>
>> an17/msg00004.html<br>
>><br>
>> IGOs seem to misunderstand their choices. As I wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> "Note that the above roadmap is in addition to all the other legal and<br>
>> non-legal options that an IGO has, including:<br>
>><br>
>> - sending cease and desist letters<br>
>> - filing WHOIS accuracy complaints (most criminals use false WHOIS)<br>
>> - contacting registrars when there is abusive/illegal conduct<br>
>> - contacting payment processors (Paypal, Visa, Mastercard, etc.) in<br>
>> the event of financial fraud<br>
>> - contacting webhosting companies to take down illegal content<br>
>> - pursuing court action as a first option<br>
>> - asking law enforcement to pursue criminal behaviour"<br>
>><br>
>> The entire work of that "small discussion group" seems to want to<br>
>> reinvent the wheel, and replace all existing law in 200+ countries<br>
>> with poorly thought out ICANN mechanisms that eliminate due process<br>
>> for registrants.<br>
>><br>
>> 5. One of the ICANN board members stated at<br>
>> <a href="http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/discussion-igo-rc/2017-April/000139.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/<wbr>discussion-igo-rc/2017-April/0<wbr>00139.html</a><br>
>> that<br>
>><br>
>> "I agree, excellent idea, but selection of the expert will be key. The<br>
>> GNSO had asked for a legal opinion before, but it was a US expert<br>
>> whose conception of international law was not necessarily shared by<br>
>> the Europeans!"<br>
>><br>
>> Not only is this an unfair assessment of Professor Swaine's work, it<br>
>> seems to suggest that IGOs can "massage" the process and predetermine<br>
>> the outcome through selection of an "expert" who will parrot their<br>
>> incorrect views. This is alarming.<br>
>><br>
>> While he seemed to backtrack a bit in a followup post at:<br>
>><br>
>> <a href="http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/discussion-igo-rc/2017-April/000142.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/<wbr>discussion-igo-rc/2017-April/0<wbr>00142.html</a><br>
>><br>
>> it still seems that there are issues of gaming the outcome via<br>
>> selection of a "sympathetic expert". We saw that in the new gTLD<br>
>> process itself, when ICANN commissioned dubious external "economic<br>
>> reports" by the Compass Group in order to support a predetermined<br>
>> outcome desired by the ICANN Board.<br>
>><br>
>> In conclusion, I think this demonstrates why having a "parallel" group<br>
>> is a bad idea, because it's trying to redo our comprehensive work, and<br>
>> has fewer eyes on it compared to this formal PDP. It makes little<br>
>> sense to me that IGOs have ample time to participate in that mailing<br>
>> list, yet had no time to participate in our PDP as members. I think<br>
>> that highlights the "forum shopping" argument, that IGOs are looking<br>
>> for sympathetic forums (of which binding arbitration is an example) to<br>
>> gain advantages of an uneven playing field.<br>
>><br>
>> Other members of this PDP working group might want to take some time<br>
>> to review those mailing list archives (took me a couple of hours,<br>
>> although I didn't review any audio or transcripts or their Wiki), to<br>
>> look for other factual errors and issues that might not have been<br>
>> caught by that group.<br>
>><br>
>> Sincerely,<br>
>><br>
>> George Kirikos<br>
>> <a href="tel:416-588-0269" value="+14165880269" target="_blank">416-588-0269</a><br>
>> <a href="http://www.leap.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.leap.com/</a><br>
>> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
>> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org" target="_blank">Gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org</a><br>
>> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/l<wbr>istinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp</a><br>
> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org" target="_blank">Gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/l<wbr>istinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp</a><br>
><br>
> ______________________________<wbr>__<br>
><br>
> El presente correo y cualquier posible archivo adjunto está dirigido únicamente al destinatario del mensaje y contiene información que puede ser confidencial. Si Ud. no es el destinatario correcto por favor notifique al remitente respondiendo anexando este mensaje y elimine inmediatamente el e-mail y los posibles archivos adjuntos al mismo de su sistema. Está prohibida cualquier utilización, difusión o copia de este e-mail por cualquier persona o entidad que no sean las específicas destinatarias del mensaje. ANTEL no acepta ninguna responsabilidad con respecto a cualquier comunicación que haya sido emitida incumpliendo nuestra Política de Seguridad de la Información<br>
><br>
><br>
> This e-mail and any attachment is confidential and is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not intended recipient please inform the sender immediately, answering this e-mail and delete it as well as the attached files. Any use, circulation or copy of this e-mail by any person or entity that is not the specific addressee(s) is prohibited. ANTEL is not responsible for any communication emitted without respecting our Information Security Policy.<br>
> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org" target="_blank">Gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/l<wbr>istinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp</a><br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org" target="_blank">Gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/l<wbr>istinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp</a></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>