[Chapter-delegates] Internet Society 2011 IPR activities - Building a truly open and international dialogue

Fri Jan 21 16:44:24 PST 2011

Hi Eric,

I might point out a survey, admittedly from a source interested in
generating new TLD's, that suggests this is an overblown concern.

http://www.mindsandmachines.com/2010/02/survey-shows-brands-dont-register-defensively-in-new-gtlds/

<http://www.mindsandmachines.com/2010/02/survey-shows-brands-dont-register-defensively-in-new-gtlds/>
j

On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Eric Burger <eburger at standardstrack.com>wrote:

> I would be careful here. One of the strong arguments against new gTLDs is
> that it is a pure extortion / tax on established brands. Unfortunately, this
> is one of these problems with no single right answer.
>
> Let us say there is a well established brand, Example. Someone registering
> example.gtld is clearly trying to either phish Example customer data or
> squat to extort money from Example. Saying that Example can feel free to bid
> on exmple.gtld highlights the problem: Example is forced to bid on the
> domain. Conversely, just because someone has an existing domain in one gTLD
> does not necessarily entitle them to that name in all gTLDs.
>
>
> On Jan 21, 2011, at 2:52 PM, Patrick Vande Walle wrote:
>
> Thanks Christine for sharing this early draft. I have no doubt the chapters
> will be eager to help develop policy papers, as several are already involved
> in these issues at national, regional or global levels.
>
> One major omission I see in this document are the IPR issues in the context
> of new gTLDs. As you know, the IPR lobby has been harassing ICANN staff,
> constituencies, board and governments for two years to let them (the IPR
> holders) get an ultimate veto power on new TLDs. Many chapters have been
> very active through the ALAC and NCUC/NCSG to oppose that power grab, in the
> interest of free speech.
>
> I am interested to hear ISOC's thoughts on that matter. This is a pressing
> issue. It is happening right now. Chapters have worked very hard on this.
>  We need ISOC to weight in, alongside its chapters.
>
> It is all well to get yet another forum to talk. But what we actually need
> from ISOC are clear, unambiguous, positions.  I hope ISOC has more ambition
> that just handle the logistics of such forum.
>
> Patrick
>
>
> On 21 Jan 2011, at 09:11, runnegar at isoc.org wrote:
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> As you may recall, last year, the Internet Society was granted Permanent
> Observer Status with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).
>
> Building on the 2009-2010 membership consultation on emerging policy
> responses to online copyright infringement (the ISOC Copyright WG) and the
> work undertaken by the Internet Society on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade
> Agreement, the Internet Society will be expanding its outreach in 2011 on
> online IPR issues to governmental and inter-governmental organizations (at
> the international, regional and local level).
>
> *Creating the conditions of an open and multi-stakeholder dialogue*
>
> As governments and international organizations elaborate their policy
> frameworks, we have observed a critical need to encourage a multi-level
> discussion (among and between international organizations, regional forums,
> national authorities and all stakeholders).  Rather than commenting on
> specific frameworks, our primary mission in 2011 will be to engage with all
> relevant actors with a view to enroling them in an international and
> multi-stakeholder dialogue.
>
> Our contribution and message will focus on international aspects of the
> debate (e.g. international comparisons of policy frameworks presented by the
> soon to be finalised ISOC Copyright WG discussion document). The rationale
> is that, as national frameworks cannot be conceived independently from the
> global network, policymakers must engage in a dialogue with relevant
> stakeholders and international organizations. Additionally, since the issues
> are global in nature, it is critical to facilitate multi-stakeholder
> international platforms for discussion to help governments identify the best
> solutions. In any case, there is increasing governmental interest in global
> solutions, particularly in the area of enforcement (e.g. ACTA).
>
> * 2011 Multi-level engagement plan*
>
> In 2011, we plan to respond to independent advisory requests and engage
> with all relevant authorities and stakeholders to leverage our advocacy
> plan. Our recently obtained Permanent Observer status with WIPO will be very
> helpful in this regard.  We also plan to advise the OECD countries through
> the work of the Internet Technical Advisory Committee (ITAC) which is
> coordinated by ISOC. Our call for an international and multi-stakeholder
> dialogue will also be promoted at regional levels through, for example,
> meetings organised by African inter-governmental organisations, where I am
> planning to provide advice to African ministers, and national levels such as
> the French Hadopi, which has requested that Constance Bommelaer provide
> expertise on international issues to the Secretariat. We will look for other
> opportunities to engage with policymakers (e.g. G8, G20, WTO, EU, national
> authorities) and other stakeholders on these issues, and continue engaging
> with our membership as further participation opportunities arise.
>
> Finally, we are working on the organization of a joint workshop with WIPO
> in the summer where all relevant actors, from all sectors, at the
> international, regional and national level, will be invited to participate.
> The objective will be to gather all the above-mentioned actors and create
> the conditions for an open and inclusive dialogue. Input from our membership
> will again be critical.
>
> In brief, the Internet Society’s objectives will be to provide independent
> expertise and to:
>
> -         Promote and create dialogue opportunities among stakeholders at
> all levels
>
> -         Put issues in an international perspective
>
> -         Inform policymakers about the founding principles of the
> Internet architecture and ecosystem
>
> We will shortly be launching a blog dedicated to these issues to share
> information and exchange ideas with our members and hope you will be able to
> participate.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Christine Runnegar
> Senior Manager
> Public Policy
> Internet Society
>
> Constance Bommelaer
> Senior Manager
> Strategic Global Engagement
> Internet Society
>  _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>
>
>
> --
> Patrick Vande Walle
> Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu
> Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu
> Facebook: http://facebook.vande-walle.eu
> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.vande-walle.eu
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>
>

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
 http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
  VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
---------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20110121/a559d770/attachment.htm>