<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none"><!--P{margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} --></style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper" style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;background-color:#FFFFFF;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">
<p>Robin,</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Please add my name in support of this document. I invite all NCSG members to do the same.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Kind Regards,</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Roy Balleste</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<hr tabindex="-1" style="display:inline-block; width:98%">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000" face="Calibri, sans-serif"><b>From:</b> NCSG-Discuss <NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU> on behalf of Robin Gross <robin@IPJUSTICE.ORG><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, December 30, 2014 2:01 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Civil Society Statement on GAC Sub-Group's Proposal on "Geographic Names" in Top Level Domain Names</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>FYI: Here's the text again:
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Civil Society Comments on the Proposal of the ICANN GAC Sub-Group on Geographic Names</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">December 2014</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Introduction and Summary</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Thank you for this opportunity to provide comments on the proposal in the document entitled, “The protection of geographic names in the new gTLDs process,” published by ICANN’s Governmental Advisory
Committee (GAC) Sub-group on Geographic Names regarding future rounds of gTLDs and dated 29 August 2014.<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" title="" style=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"">[1]</span></span></span></span></a><span style="">
</span>We caution against the adoption of the proposal because it would threaten to chill freedom of expression and other lawful rights to use words in domain names, stifle innovation, and undermine the multi-stakeholder model for Internet governance.<span style="">
</span>The proposal is based on flawed presumptions of law and “the public interest” and is entirely unworkable from a practical standpoint.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">The GAC sub-group proposes that “geographic names should not be allowed to be registered as gTLDs, unless requested by the relevant communities where they belong or after a specific authorization
given by the government or community to the applicant.<span style=""> </span>The national community and geographic meaning of the requested strings as new gTLDs must prevail above any other interest.”<span style="">
</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">The proposal asserts that ICANN’s Applicant Guidebook text should be amended to state: “ICANN should avoid country, territory or place names, and country, territory or regional language or people
descriptions, unless in agreement with the relevant governments or public authorities.”<span style="">
</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">The proposal attempts to apply national law pertaining to geographic names to domain names, although it goes much further, and re-asserts the controversial 2007 GAC Principle: “New gTLDs should
respect national sensitivities regarding terms with national, cultural, geographic and religious significance.”<span style="">
</span>ICANN’s Board wisely rejected that 2007 GAC Principle, which opens the door for governmental censorship of domain names.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Unfortunately this proposal is based on fundamental misinterpretations of international law around geographic names; it is overbroad, vague, arbitrary, and entirely unworkable in practice.<span style="">
</span>Furthermore, it would severely chill freedom of expression, innovation, and the free flow of information on the Internet should the proposal become global domain name policy.<span style="">
</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">One of the historical reasons the Internet has flourished is precisely because permission was not required of governments before ideas were allowed to be expressed or otherwise spread in the domain
name system.<span style=""> </span>Yet this proposal undermines the principles of permissionless innovation and freedom of expression by creating a “permission-required” domain name system, although permission
<i style="">from whom</i> and <i style="">for what</i> is entirely unknowable in advance.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Proposal Based on False Understandings and Misapplications of Law</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Despite the document’s labeling of this proposal as pertaining to “geographic names” there is nothing in international law to support the proposal’s creation of new worldwide exclusive rights
to control the use <span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T22:58">of </ins>
</span>words in the domain name system.<span style=""> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">The proposal misapplies trademark law and conflates national regulation of geographic indicators with an exclusive worldwide right to regulate language in domain names.<span style="">
</span>Legal rights regarding geographic indicators only regulate the commercial use of marks in connection with specific goods and services, and in only specific territories –
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T22:59">they do </ins></span>not <span class="msoIns">
<ins datetime="2014-12-20T22:59">create a blanket</ins></span> right to regulate the use of words in the domain name system in all categories of goods and services, and in all nations of the world.<span style="">
</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">International law pertaining to the restriction of sovereign names and identifiers does not recognize geographic names outside of a specific country’s borders.<span style="">
</span>The proposal ignores important territorial restrictions and extends <span class="msoIns">
<ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:00">protection</ins></span> to the entire world. <span style="">
</span>This proposal would create worldwide exclusive rights for governments to regulate the use of words in domains that are not legitimately based in any law.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">“Public Interest” Presumed Prematurely</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Besides the fundamental misapplications of law, the proposal also relies upon questionable presumptions of what is in the “public interest” and thus the most appropriate policy for ICANN to pursue.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">ICANN domain name policy impact<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:01">s</ins></span> many diverse stakeholders
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:01">with</ins></span> a variety of legitimate interests<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:01">,</ins></span> including freedom of expression rights and other noncommercial interests, commercial
interests, and the interests of governments<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:02">.</ins></span>
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-21T11:06"><span style=""> </span></ins></span><span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:02">A</ins></span>ll of
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:02">these </ins></span>are supposedly balanced
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:02">in the policy development process
</ins></span>to reach a consensus that takes into account all the stakeholders’ interests.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">In contrast, the GAC document boldly asserts: “The national community and geographic meaning of the requested strings as new gTLDs must prevail above any other interest.”<span style="">
</span>No argument is given for this proposition, however.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">ICANN’s policy development process was established to balance the various competing legitimate interests, including the interests of governments, so it is not appropriate for a GAC sub-group to
presume that in that conversation among all interests that the governments’ specific view would naturally prevail as “the public interest<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:03">.</ins></span>”<span style="">
</span>Let’s not skip the conversation <span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:03">with all stakeholders about
</ins></span>what policy would best reflect the public interest.<span style=""> </span>
A discussion about the rights of Internet users to free expression weighed against a government’s interest to regulate words used in domain names would be a good starting point.<span style="">
</span>This proposal presumes that a single stakeholder (the <span class="msoIns">
<ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:04">GAC</ins></span>) is the exclusive arbiter of “the global public interest”, a position that significantly undermines ICANN’s multi-stakeholder policy development process.<span style="">
</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Undermines Freedom of Expression Rights</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">One of the biggest concerns with the proposal’s implementation is its chilling impact on freedom of expression in the Internet domain name system. While the document never uses the word, what
it proposes in operation is <i style="">censorship</i>.<span style=""> </span>The proposal entirely ignores freedom of expression rights in domain names and makes no mention or consideration for those legitimate interests of Internet users in its analysis.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Since the Internet’s inception, courts of law throughout the world have generally recognized Internet users’ freedom of expression rights to use domain names.<a href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2" title="" style=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"">[2]</span></span></span></span></a><span style="">
</span>Indeed the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) cites freedom of expression rights as one of the primary reasons that there are so many disputes regarding the use of Internet domain names.<a href="#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3" title="" style=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"">[3]</span></span></span></span></a></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees everyone the right to freedom of opinion and expression including the “freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek,
receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”<span style="">
</span>There is no exception made for exchanging ideas in the Internet domain name space; indeed the guarantee is explicitly clear that free speech
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:05">rights apply </ins></span>regardless of the type of media and the breadth of the reach of the communication.<span style="">
</span>Article 19 of the UNDHR speaks directly to the Internet age and global domain name policy, although adopted the UN General Assembly
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-21T11:49">half a century</ins></span> ago.<span style="">
</span>Other international legal instruments such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights create similar free speech obligations, which are binding on nations to protect the rights of Internet users to communicate freely on the Internet.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""><span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-21T11:26">T</ins></span>he GAC proposal ignores the existing new gTLD policy passed by ICANN’s GNSO Council, including “Principle G”, which states,
“The string evaluation process must not infringe the applicant’s freedom of expression rights that are protected under internationally recognized principles of law.”<span style="">
</span>Recommendation 3 of ICANN’s “Implementation Guidelines” reinforces the GNSO’s intention to respect domain name applicants’ freedom of expression rights in domain names.<a href="#_ftn4" name="_ftnref4" title="" style=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"">[4]</span></span></span></span></a>
<span style=""> </span>These initial protections built by the GNSO to protect applicants’ free expression rights would be significantly curtailed by the policy change proposed by the GAC sub-group.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Despite longstanding internationally accepted and legally binding obligations to protect freedom of expression and the GNSO’s effort to protect free expression in the initial policy, the GAC proposal
does not <span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:06">even </ins></span>consider these rights<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:06">,</ins></span>
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:06">nor does it consider </ins>
</span>free expression <span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:06">as furthering the public interest
</ins></span>anywhere in its analysis.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Important public governance obligations, such as protection for free expression rights, cannot be avoided simply by outsourcing governance functions to private corporations, such as ICANN.<span style="">
</span>It is no longer an acceptable argument to claim that because ICANN is a private corporation, it owes no obligation to protect Internet users’ free expression rights.<span style="">
</span>ICANN undertakes public governance functions and so will have to evolve its understanding of the responsibilities it has to protect the fundamental rights of Internet users in its policies, especially if it wishes to maintain those functions in the future.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Unworkable Practically: Too Broad, Uncertain, and Vague</span></b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">
<b style=""></b></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Another significant concern about the proposal to restrict geographic names is that it is completely unworkable from a practical standpoint.<span style="">
</span>The proffered restriction on entire categories of words in domain names is excessively broad, vague, uncertain, and arbitrary.<span style="">
</span>Given the broad categories of words restricted, the different meanings of words, and the many languages in the world, it would be impossible to predict which words must receive advance permission before ICANN will consider them in a gTLD application.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">The proposal reach<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:08">es</ins></span>
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:08">too </ins></span>far – it would restrict<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:08">
</ins></span>any and all words that<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:08">,</ins></span> in a single government’s view<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:08">,</ins></span> are of “national interest”<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:08">
–</ins></span> including names of “regions of countries, regions of continents, sub-regions of countries, rivers, mountains, among others.”<span style="">
</span>Although not geographic names per se, the GAC Sub-group’s proposed restrictions additionally extend to words that describe
<i style="">people</i> or <i style="">languages</i>.<span style=""> </span>How could any applicant realistically be expected to know which words every government (or other relevant authority) in the world lays claim to?<span style="">
</span>Obviously such a policy is unworkable <span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:09">due to
</ins></span>the over<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:09">ly broad</ins></span>, vague and uncertain abridgements on expression<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:09"> it would impose</ins></span>.<span style="">
</span>Additionally<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:09">,</ins></span> the proposal’s arbitrariness is ripe for abuse and confusion in the administration of the domain name system.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">The proposal is also problematic for its substantial lack of clarity regarding which “relevant governments or public authorities” must provide permissions before a word can be used in a domain
name.<span style=""> </span>Take the simple yet illustrative example of the Great Lakes Region and international waterway straddling Canada and the U.S.<span style="">
</span>From whom should an applicant obtain permission before the words “Great Lakes” can be used in a gTLD?<span style="">
</span>Who are the “relevant governments and authorities” that must provide permission before the gTLD can go forward in such case?<span style="">
</span>Is it the government of the United States<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:10">,</ins></span> Canada<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:10"> or both</ins></span>?<span style="">
</span>Perhaps the State of Michigan or the province of Ontario must be consulted<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:10">, too</ins></span>.
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-21T11:31"><span style=""> </span></ins></span>What about the sovereign Indian Nations after which the Great Lakes of Huron, Ontario, Michigan, and Erie were named – would their permission be required also should any
application include those words? <span style=""> </span>The lack of clarity as to which relevant authorities must provide advance permission for a gTLD application to go forward and the lack of clarity as to which words require advance permission render the
proposal entirely unworkable from a practical standpoint.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Under the GNSO’s adopted policy, Recommendation 1 of its New gTLD Implementation Guidelines clearly states that “all applicants…should be evaluated against transparent, and predictable criteria,
fully available to the applicants prior to the initiation of the process… No subsequent selection criteria should be used in the selection process.”<span style="">
</span>How the GAC Sub-group’s proposal on geographic names could be adopted without repealing the GNSO’s policy, which requires objectively knowable and predictable criteria<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:11">,</ins></span> has not been discussed.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">A Permission-Required DNS is</span></b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">
<b style="">Anti-Innovation</b></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Another problematic aspect of the GAC Sub-group’s proposal on geographic names is the
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:11">number </ins></span>and complexity of permissions required before gTLDs are allowed to proceed<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:11">.</ins></span>
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:11">This </ins></span>will have a stifling effect on innovation.<span style="">
</span>The proposal adds burdensome red-tape, will slow the development of the Internet, and saddles consumers with higher costs<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-21T11:36"> and restricted choices</ins></span>.<span style="">
</span>This plan basically creates a veto power that any government or other relevant authority could exercise over any proposed gTLD.<span style="">
</span>It invites politicization into the DNS administration, which is <span class="msoIns">
<ins datetime="2014-12-21T11:38">un</ins></span>healthy to the growth and development of the Internet.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Permissionless innovation is a fundamental characteristic of the Internet that contributed dramatically to its growth and beneficial development<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:12">.</ins></span>
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-21T11:36"><span style=""> </span></ins></span><span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:12">I</ins></span>t would be unfortunate for ICANN to move the DNS into a permission-required environment, where any
government in the world can veto any gTLD which contains a word it <span class="msoIns">
<ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:12">unilaterally </ins></span>claims invokes national sensitivities.<span style="">
</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">An analysis of the possible benefits of the proposal weighed against the harms to innovation and free expression would be an important step of any serious consideration of such a policy’s adoption.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Inappropriate Forum - Policy Laundering?</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">ICANN is an inappropriate forum to undertake the creation of new “intellectual property like” global rights to geographic names.<span style="">
</span>As a technical coordinator, ICANN is not an international legal regime and<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:13"> its board</ins></span> has neither
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:13">the </ins></span>expertise nor
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:13">the </ins></span>authority to create new exclusive rights to categories of words.<span style="">
</span>If the governments in the GAC Sub-group believe there is a legitimate need for such new rights, those efforts should be directed toward proper lawmaking
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:13">and treaty </ins></span>channels.
<span style=""> </span>International legal regimes such as the World Trade Organization or WIPO were established by governments to harmonize legal rights across borders and similar proposals around geographic names have been debated for years at the WTO and
have failed.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Inventing exclusive new global rights to words would seriously undermine ICANN’s legitimacy and credibility to manage the domain name system.<span style="">
</span>At a time when many are watching ICANN to see if it has matured enough to be cut lose from the US NTIA, opening itself up to charges of “policy laundering” by inventing new rights to geographic names would not help the organization’s credibility.<span style="">
</span>While the proposal’s drafters may have some legitimate concerns regarding the use of certain limited geographic names, ICANN is not the appropriate forum for creating such new rights.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Conclusion:<span style="">
</span><span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:13">A</ins></span>n Unbalanced Proposal that Should be Rejected
</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">The GAC Sub-group’s proposal to amend ICANN policy to grant governments and other “relevant authorities” a veto over any new gTLD application is very problematic and should be rejected.<span style="">
</span>It is based on a dubious interpretation of international law and questionable conclusions as to what policy best reflects the public interest as a whole.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">The proposal is excessively broad in the categories of words that it restricts and excessively vague and burdensome in
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:14">the </ins></span>permissions
<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:14">it requires </ins></span>to proceed with a gTLD in future rounds.<span style="">
</span>Freedom of expression rights to domain names would be severely abridged and innovation stifled by the ability of any government to veto any gTLD as proposed.<span class="msoIns"><ins datetime="2014-12-20T23:14">
</ins></span>Furthermore the proposal re-asserts the controversial 2007 GAC Principle that requires gTLDs to “respect national sensitivities regarding terms with national, cultural, geographic and religious significance.”<span style="">
</span>Thus the proposal sets a dangerous precedent for building government censorship into the DNS.<span style="">
</span>In other words, it is a bad policy for Internet freedom that should not be adopted.<span style="">
</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Respectfully submitted,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""><u>Organizations:</u></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">IP Justice</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Internet Governance Project</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Public Knowledge</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Article 19</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Electronic Frontier Finland</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Movimento Mega (Brazil)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Digital Rights Ireland</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Bytes For All (Pakistan)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Electronic Frontiers Australia</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Open Institute Cambodia</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Access Humboldt</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""><u>Individuals:</u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'">Timothe Litt</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Nicolas Adam</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Dan Krimm</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">Kathy Kleiman</span></p>
<div style=""><br clear="all">
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%">
<div id="ftn1" style="">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1" title="" style=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""><span style=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"">[1]</span></span></span></span></span></a><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">
Available at <a href="https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/27132037/Geo%20names%20in%20new%20gTLDs%20Updated%20%20V3%20%2029%20august%202014%5B4%5D.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1411549935000&api=v2">
https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/27132037/Geo%20names%20in%20new%20gTLDs%20Updated%20%20V3%20%2029%20august%202014%5B4%5D.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1411549935000&api=v2</a></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ftn2" style="">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a href="#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2" title="" style=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""><span style=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"">[2]</span></span></span></span></span></a><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">
See <i style="">Taubman Co. v. Webfeats</i>, 319 F.3d 770, 778 (6<sup>th</sup> Circuit 2003) “the domain name is a type of expression, no different in scope than a billboard or a pulpit”.<span style="">
</span>See also <i style="">Shell Trademark Mgmt. BV v. Canadian AMOCO</i>, No. 02-01365, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9597, at *10-11 (N.D. Cal. May 21, 2002) analogizing domain names to road signs.<span style="">
</span>See also <i style="">Center for Democracy and Technology v. Pappert</i>, 337 F. Supp.2<sup>nd</sup> 606, 651 (E.D. Pa. 2004) holding a statute requiring the blocking of access to particular domain names and IP addresses amounted to an unconstitutional
restraint on speech. See also <i style="">ACLU v. Reno</i> which held that the Internet is entitled to the full protection given to media like the print press under freedom of expression rights. 521 U.S. 844 (1997).</span></p>
</div>
<div id="ftn3" style="">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a href="#_ftnref3" name="_ftn3" title="" style=""></a><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""><span style=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"">[3]</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""><span style="">
</span><a href="http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/center/faq/domains.html">http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/center/faq/domains.html</a></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ftn4" style="">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a href="#_ftnref4" name="_ftn4" title="" style=""></a><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p>
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""><span style=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"">[4]</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman"">
<a href="http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/summary-principles-recommendations-implementation-guidelines-22oct08.doc.pdf">
http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/summary-principles-recommendations-implementation-guidelines-22oct08.doc.pdf</a></span></p>
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""><br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""><br>
</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
<div>
<div>On Dec 30, 2014, at 10:17 AM, Robin Gross wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>Thanks for the support, folks! If there are other organizations who would like to sign-on to the civil society statement, please let me know today. Also, I've received some requests for individuals to sign-on as well, and so have opened up the statement
for individuals to also endorse should one wish to. <br>
<br>
So if any individual or organization would like to sign-on to this joint civil society statement, please let me know within 24 hours from now.<br>
<br>
Thanks again!<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
Robin<br>
<br>
<br>
On Dec 28, 2014, at 10:25 PM, Robin Gross wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Hello All,<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">If any of NCSG's member organizations (or NCSG as a whole) would like to sign-on to this civil society statement regarding a GAC sub-group's proposal to give governments veto power on new top level domain names that use "geographic names"
please let me know asap.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">The GAC sub-group's proposal on "geographic names" and other comments submitted on this proposal are available here:<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><a href="https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/Governmental+Advisory+Committee">https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/Governmental+Advisory+Committee</a><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">The GAC's deadline for comments is 31 December, so please let me know by 30 December if your civil society organization would like to sign-on to this joint civil society statement; it is currently open for sign-on by other civil society
organizations until 30 December. Or send in your own comment on the proposal if you are so inclined (at the link above) by 31 December. Holiday deadlines are tough, I know! <br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">I think this is a very important policy issue for protecting freedom of expression and the positive development of the multi-stakeholder model for Internet governance.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Thanks very much!<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">All best,<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Robin<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><2014_December_Comments_GAC-Geo-Names_FINAL_1.docx><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>