[Gnso-igo-ingo] Follow-up to the second WG call of 20 July 2017 - Reconvened IGO-INGO Working Group on Red Cross and Red Crescent Names and Identifiers
Stephane Hankins
shankins at icrc.org
Tue Aug 8 14:15:44 UTC 2017
Dear James,
Thank you for this. Regarding the ICRC and IFRC acronyms, this is also the
conclusion we intended to underscore - namely that, while the ICRC and
IFRC acronyms may/do not meet the third test as agreed during the
Facilitated Discussions in Copenhagen (that there be no other legitimate
users for the String) - a policy recommendation be made to ensure and
confirm access to curative rights mechanisms.
As recalled in Charlotte's last message, access to (cost neutral) curative
rights mechanisms for the acronyms would also be congruent with the the
GAC's own past advice (as adopted in Durban in July 2013) and our
suggestion would be that the reconvened WG and the GNSO consider to also
adopt a recommendation to this effect.
This is mindful of the objectives sought of reconciling the GNSO's 2013
Recommendations with the GAC's past advice.
Kind regards,
Stéphane (and Charlotte)
From: "jbladel at godaddy.com" <jbladel at godaddy.com>
To: Chuck Gomes Consulting <consult at cgomes.com>, 'Stephane Hankins'
<shankins at icrc.org>
Cc: "gnso-secs at icann.org" <gnso-secs at icann.org>,
"gnso-igo-ingo at icann.org" <gnso-igo-ingo at icann.org>
Date: 08.08.2017 15:31
Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo] Follow-up to the second WG call of 20
July 2017 - Reconvened IGO-INGO Working Group on Red Cross and Red
Crescent Names and Identifiers
Thanks to Chuck, Stephane and especially Charlotte for their valuable
contributions in this thread.
If we go back to the Facilitated Discussions in Copenhagen, we landed on
three factors for reconsidering protections for RC/RC strings in the DNS
(note, these are also reflected in the GNSO Council resolution that
re-activated this PDP). Roughly paraphrased, they were:
That the protections were based upon / reflected in national and
international law, and
That the list of covered strings was finite, and was amended only via
consistent & visible processes, and
There were no other legitimate uses for the string.
Circling back to Charlotte’s message, her points (1) and (2) and (3) are
meant to establish that the first two tests are being met. Similarly,
points (3) and (5) help to define the list of covered strings as finite,
and only occasionally modified via well-established processes (Marshall
Islands). However, I believe that point (4) (ICRC and IFRC) fail the third
test: requiring that there are no other legitimate uses for the strings.
This is always a problem with acronyms, as they often collide with
unrelated terms, organizations, or industries. For example, a quick
search of “ICRC” notes that while this string is commonly associated with
the International Committee of the Red Cross, it is also used by the
Indiana Civil Rights Commission, the International Certification and
Reciprocity Consortium, the Intercollege Relations Commission, and the
International Conference of Reformed Churches. Policies should not
prohibit or reserve the use of these strings in gTLDs, but rather ensure
access to curative rights for the RC (or any of the other organizations)
that are harmed when these strings are abused.
Thanks—
J.
From: <gnso-igo-ingo-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Chuck Gomes
Consulting <consult at cgomes.com>
Date: Monday, August 7, 2017 at 10:51
To: 'Stephane Hankins' <shankins at icrc.org>
Cc: "'gnso-secs at icann.org'" <gnso-secs at icann.org>,
"gnso-igo-ingo at icann.org" <gnso-igo-ingo at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo] Follow-up to the second WG call of 20 July
2017 - Reconvened IGO-INGO Working Group on Red Cross and Red Crescent
Names and Identifiers
Stephane,
You in essence did what I was suggesting Charlotte do. It wasn’t that I
didn’t understand but rather that it was a fairly complicated and long
message that I thought would benefit from a simpler explanation.
Chuck
From: Stephane Hankins [mailto:shankins at icrc.org]
Sent: Monday, August 7, 2017 12:50 AM
To: Chuck Gomes Consulting <consult at cgomes.com>
Cc: 'Charlotte Lindsey Curtet' <clindsey at icrc.org>;
gnso-igo-ingo at icann.org; gnso-secs at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo] Follow-up to the second WG call of 20 July
2017 - Reconvened IGO-INGO Working Group on Red Cross and Red Crescent
Names and Identifiers
Dear Chuck,
Could you kindly clarify for us what is unclear. Charlotte's message below
is to us written in a reasonably plain language.
Point (2) aims to explicate what, in our understanding, an ammendment to
the GNSO's 2013 Recommendations would imply in order to achieve a
reconciliation with past GAC advice.
Point (3) suggests that in the interest of achieving a reconciliation of
the 2013 GNSO recommendation and GAC advice, consideration would also
require to be given to the full names of the ICRC and of the International
Federation (the two international bodies within the International red
Cross and Red Crescent Movement), in addition to the identifiers of
National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies.
Point (4) confirms our ask regarding the ICRC and IFRC acronyms and
suggests that the reconvened WG also consider to issue a recommendation in
regard to the latter (in line with the GAC advice).
Point (5) recalls our availability to provide a revised list of name in
the interest of consistency, as discussed and requested in Copenhagen.
If the concern is regarding the attachments, please advise what you think
could be helpful. The suggestion was made, if I am not mistaken during the
last WG session, that further clarity be provided regarding the legal
grounds for the protections for the Red Cross and Red Crescent identifiers
- this is what the attached Report (and its annexes) seek to provide.
Many thanks and kind regards,
Stéphane (and Charlotte - presently on leave)
From: "Chuck Gomes Consulting" <consult at cgomes.com>
To: "'Charlotte Lindsey Curtet'" <clindsey at icrc.org>, <
gnso-igo-ingo at icann.org>
Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org
Date: 06.08.2017 19:11
Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo] Follow-up to the second WG call of 20
July 2017 - Reconvened IGO-INGO Working Group on Red Cross and Red
Crescent Names and Identifiers
Sent by: gnso-igo-ingo-bounces at icann.org
Thanks for this Charlotte. I appreciate the need for being precise when
writing legal language but found that I had to read this several times to
grasp what is said. It would be helpful for me if your message was
briefly summarized with a list of the key points made.
Chuck
From: gnso-igo-ingo-bounces at icann.org [
mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Charlotte Lindsey
Curtet
Sent: Friday, August 4, 2017 4:46 AM
To: gnso-igo-ingo at icann.org
Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org
Subject: [Gnso-igo-ingo] Follow-up to the second WG call of 20 July 2017 -
Reconvened IGO-INGO Working Group on Red Cross and Red Crescent Names and
Identifiers
Dear Thomas, dear James,
Dear Members of the reconvened Working Group,
(1) Further to the discussions held during the second meeting of the
reconvened Working group IGO/INGO Protections PDP Working Group held on 20
July, please find attached a copy of the Non-paper we had submitted to
ICANN’s Board and to the process in 2013.
The attached includes a descriptive of the legal protections of the Red
Cross, Red Crescent and Red Crystal designations and of the
names/identifiers of the respective Red Cross and Red Crescent
organizations under international law and under the domestic laws in force
in multiple national jurisdictions.
It includes as an annex an outline of relevant extracts from the first
Geneva Convention of 1949 and of the third Additional Protocol adopted in
2005, and a list of national laws in force in different national
jurisdictions on the use and protection of the emblems and their
designations (the list would require now to be updated to include more
recent national laws/Governmental decrees, as adopted inter alia in South
Sudan, Sweden and Venezuela).
(2) We take note, as underlined during the recent reconvened Working group
discussions, of the WG’s defined objectives to determine whether the
current protections accorded to the Red Cross and Red Crescent
designations and identifiers (as included under Specification 5 of the
Model Registry Agreement) should be confirmed as permanent.
In line with the recommendations of the NGPC/the Board's Resolutions that
the GNSO’s 2013 Recommendations be reconciled with the GAC’s consistent
advice, this would imply that the GNSO’s 2013 recommendations be revised
on two counts:
- firstly, to extend the protections accorded to the Red Cross, Red
Crescent and Red Crystal designations (Scope 1 identifiers) to the full
exact match names of the respective Red Cross and Red Crescent
organizations (Scope 2 identifiers); and
- second, to confirm the protections of the Red Cross and Red Crescent
designations and identifiers (Scope 1 and Scope 2) as permanent.
(3) As recalled during the last reconvened Working Group session and in
line with the GNSO’s decision to initiate its process for Amendments or
Modifications of Approved Policies with regard to Recommendation 5 Section
3.1 of the 2013 Final Report, the extension of the protections should
importantly be made to cover not only the names of the respective National
Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (190 in total to date), but also the
full exact match names of the two international components of the
International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement in the six UN languages.
This is congruent with the definition of Scope 2 identifiers as included
in the Final Report of the 2013 PDP – page 10.
This is also confirmed under the Board’s Resolution (2017.03.16.13) and
the latter's Operative paragraph (1).
Reference is also made in this regard to the GAC’s consistent advice [as
expressly stipulated in the GAC Communiqués adopted in Singapore (27 March
2014), Los Angeles (15 October 2014), Singapore (11 February 2015), and
confirmed in subsequent advice] that the Red Cross and Red Crescent
identifiers be afforded permanent protections. We wish to underline in
this regard that the names of the International Committee of the Red
Cross, of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent
Societies, and of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement
are included under Specification 5 to the Model Registry Agreement and
already enjoy temporary protections.
(4) With respect to the ICRC and IFRC acronyms (also included under the
definition of Scope 2 names adopted by the GNSO in 2013), the extension of
the permanent protections is not requested here, and thus in line with the
GAC’s past advice, as adopted in Durban (18 July 2013), that “[t]he same
complementary cost neutral mechanisms to be worked out […] for the
protections of IGO’s be used to also protect the acronyms of the
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC/IFRC) and the International
Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC/FICR)”. Given
however the importance of also protecting the acronyms of the ICRC and of
the IFRC (particularly the ICRC acronym under which the ICRC is very
commonly known and identified and which forms a part of the ICRC’s
institutional logo), we would propose that the reconvened WG consider to
issue also a recommendation in regard to the ICRC and IFRC acronyms in
line with the GAC’s above-mentioned Durban Communiqué.
(5) Lastly and further to recent exchanges with ICANN Staff, we wish to
inform the members of the reconvened Working Group that, in line with the
agreement during the Facilitated discussion held in Copenhagen, we are
amenable to work further on a revised list of Red Cross and Red Crescent
identifiers to replace the current list included under Specification 5 –
this would notably aim to amend the current titles of the two categories
of Red Cross and Red Crescent designations and identifiers (as these do
not offer clarity) and to further harmonize the list of National Red Cross
and Red Crescent Societies identifiers (and their limited and well defined
variations).
We also wish members of the WG to note, as indicated during the Copenhagen
discussion, that a new National Society is in the process of formation and
recognition, namely the “Marshall Islands Red Cross Society” and that its
name will also soon require to be added to the list.
Please do not hesitate to contact us should you require any further
clarification.
With kind regards,
Charlotte
Charlotte Lindsey Curtet
Director
Communication and Information Management Department
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)
Tel: + 41 22 730 2773
email: clindsey at icrc.org
Annexes:
- ICRC and IFRC Position paper to ICANN's Board, July/August 2013:
- Extracts from the Government Advisory Committee's Communiqués relevant
to the protection of the Red Cross and Red Crescent designations and
identifiers:
===============================================================================
The ICRC - working to protect and assist people affected by armed conflict
and other situations of violence. Find out more: www.icrc.org This e-mail
is intended for the named recipient(s) only. Its contents are confidential
and may only be retained by the named recipient (s) and may only be copied
or disclosed with the consent of the International Committee of the Red
Cross (ICRC). If you are not an intended recipient please delete this
e-mail and notify the sender.
===============================================================================
_______________________________________________
Gnso-igo-ingo mailing list
Gnso-igo-ingo at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo
The ICRC - working to protect and assist people affected by armed conflict
and other situations of violence. Find out more: www.icrc.org
This e-mail is intended for the named recipient(s) only.
Its contents are confidential and may only be retained by the named
recipient(s) and may only be copied or disclosed with the consent of the
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). If you are not an
intended recipient please delete this e-mail and notify the sender.
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<STYLE type="text/css">
<!--
p { font-family: Arial;font-size:9pt }
-->
</STYLE>
</head>
<body>
<hr style="color: #000000;background-color: #000000;height: 1px;"/>
<p>The ICRC - working to protect and assist people affected by armed conflict and other situations of violence. Find out more: <a href="http://www.icrc.org">www.icrc.org</a><p>
<p>This e-mail is intended for the named recipient(s) only.<br>
Its contents are confidential and may only be retained by the named recipient(s) and may only be copied or disclosed with the consent of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). If you are not an intended recipient please delete this e-mail and notify the sender.
</p>
<hr style="color: #000000;background-color: #000000;height: 1px;"/>
</body>
</html>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo/attachments/20170808/d037e889/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Gnso-igo-ingo
mailing list