GAC proposal to ban top level domains that use a geographic word unless permission granted from govt (next rounds of gtlds)

[Seun Ojedeji]

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 8:49 PM, Carlos Raúl G. <crg at isoc-cr.org> wrote:

> Dear Robin,
>
> What if, under the same concept of subsidiarity, instead of Governments,
> this responsibility would be delegated to the respective ccTLDs? Would it
> be more or less legitimate? Let me tell you that at least in the case of
> Costa Rica, our Government is more accountable and far more bottom up than
> the ccTLD chosen by ICANN.
>
> After the sour experience with .amazon and .patagonia I certainly agree
> that changes are necessary, probably at many levels.
>
> Which if you ask me was treated rightly in the long run(at least am sure
of .amazon), however i agree that its good to have this written in the
guideline so applicants who don't meet the criteria don't even make the
attempt of applying in the first place.

Cheers!


> If you have a better suggestion, I would love to hear it.
>
> Best
>
> Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
> +506 8335 2487
> Enviado desde mi iPhone
>
> El 3/10/2014, a las 13:17, Robin Gross <robin at IPJUSTICE.ORG> escribió:
>
> I think we should submit comments on this proposal from a GAC Sub-group on
> Geographic Names in future gtld rounds to "respect national sensitivities".
>
>
> In short, the GAC proposal calls for a change in the policy in the
> applicant guidebook to require applicants to obtain the permission of
> governments before they can use a word that could be considered a country,
> territory or place name, and country, territory or regional language or
> people descriptions.
>
> GAC wants to override the GNSO's policy from 2008 and the AGB.  GAC relies
> heavily on the presumption that restricting gtlds in this fashion is
> automatically in the public interest and therefore ICANN must do it.  Of
> course it will have the effect of dramatically restricting speech in tlds
> and further empowering governments over people's use of the Internet.
> Unfortunately the GACification of ICANN continues apace.  Sigh.
>
> Robin
>
> https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/Governmental+Advisory+Committee
> *Draft document from GAC Sub-group on Geographic Names - Community input
> sought*
>
> The GAC Sub-group on Geographic Names (a Sub-group of the GAC Working
> Group on Future New gTLDs) has developed a draft document for future New
> gTLD rounds outlining several public policy aspects related to geographic
> names and is currently seeking community input on this document:
>
> The protection of geographic names in the new gTLDs process
> <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=1411549935692&api=v2>
> .
>
> A previous version of this draft was presented in a public session during
> the London ICANN/GAC meetings and a similar session is planned for the
> October ICANN/GAC meetings in Los Angeles.  The Working Group believes the
> receipt of community input on the current draft document would be
> beneficial to the October discussions, and further welcomes comments from
> all interested parties by October 31, 2014.
>
> Comments may be submitted to future-geo-doc-comments at gac.icann.org .
>
> Comments received will be posted on the Community Input page at:
> http://tinyurl.com/nc4knhn.
> -----------------------
>
> *Paper's Conclusion:*
>
> *... Suggested changes in the Applicant Guide Book *
>
> Taking into consideration that the Durban Communiqué states that “The GAC
> recommends that ICANN collaborate with the GAC in refining, for future
> rounds, the Applicant Guidebook with regard to the protection of terms with
> national, cultural, geographic and religious significance, in accordance
> with the 2007 GAC Principles on New gTLDs”, a new text is suggested
> regarding the geographic names, in the case that the same text of the
> present AGB will be used as ground document:
>
> To include in the paragraph 2.2.1.4 of the AGB the following sentence:
>
> “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”.
>
> Also the following paragraph appears in the section “2.2.1.4.2 Geographic
> Names Requiring Government Support” of the AGB. It should be a general
> statement or principle regarding geographic names, in order to clarify and
> reinforce the importance of the previous communication between the
> Applicants and the Governments, even in case of any doubt.
>
> “Nevertheless, in the event of any doubt, it is in the applicant’s
> interest to consult with relevant governments and public authorities and
> enlist
>
> their support or non-objection prior to submission of the application, in
> order to preclude possible objections and pre-address any ambiguities
> concerning the string and applicable requirements.”
>
> A specific reference to the Geographic Names Repository described in
> section 6.b of this document must be also included.
>
> The suggested changes in the Applicant Guide Book, paragraph 2.2.1.4 of
> the AGB should read as follows:
>
> “2.2.1.4 Geographic Names Review
>
> Applications for gTLD strings must ensure that appropriate consideration
> is given to the interests of governments or public authorities in
> geographic names, taking into consideration that, according with the 2007
> GAC Principles regarding New gTLDs, 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. The requirements and procedure ICANN will follow in the
> evaluation process are described in the following paragraphs. Applicants
> should review these requirements even if they do not believe their intended
> gTLD string is a geographic name. All applied-for gTLD strings will be
> reviewed according to the requirements in this section, regardless of
> whether the application indicates it is for a geographic name.
>
> “Nevertheless, in the event of any doubt, it is in the applicant’s
> interest to consult with relevant governments and public authorities and
> enlist their support or non-objection prior to submission of the
> application, in order to preclude possible objections and pre-address any
> ambiguities concerning the string and applicable requirements.”
>
>
>
>


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------





*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:      http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
<http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email:
<http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
<seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*

The key to understanding is humility - my view !
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20141003/9095a00d/attachment.htm>