News
A Statement against IRT Report from the Prospective
of AP At-Large Community
Date: July 24, 2009 presented at ICANN Hong Kong Meeting
Drafted by Dr. Hong Xue on behalf of CDNUA, At-Large@China
and ISOC-Australia
This document is consistent with the statements and
advices made by the ALAC and At-Large Community to
the ICANN Board and that it is reflective of the views
of many ALSes within the Asia Pacific Region and that
it is expected to gain support of the APRALO as a
formal Statement at our next meeting on the 28th of
July. We also get the support from the other organizations/
key stakeholders in this Region.
A majority of Asians are non-ASCII users. The implementation
of IDN TLDs is essentially important in Asia. However,
we have concern that the IRT proposals, particularly
the additional “meaning” (commercial impression) criterion,
would negatively impact the IDN TLD applicants. Since
this criterion has never been applied to the existing
ASCII TLDs- for instance .biz was not precluded for
being “meaningfully or semantically similar” to .com,
ICANN should not impose the double standards to the
IDN TLDs merely for the protection of interests of
one stakeholder group. We strongly affirm that evaluation
of string confusion must be restricted to visual similarity,
and not be inappropriately enhanced to include "aural
or meaning (“commercial impression”)", which
is very subjective and would open the door to endless
disputes.
With respect to GPM, we concern the proposal that
“the confusing similarity analysis of applied-for
gTLD strings against GPMs include the aural and commercial
impression (meaning) of the applied-for string in
addition to the visual similarity” would unreasonably
prejudice the IDN TLD applicants. Legal protection
of a trademark in translation or transliteration must
be subject to the complicated legal analysis and judgment
based on special law in the respective territory.
ICANN has neither the authority nor capacity to do
this in the Initial Evaluation process. If taken into
account those famous marks that consist of generic
terms, the IRT proposal would seem absurd. Why should
a trademark such as “BOSS”, “DOVE” or “VOGUE” bar
the Chinese-character TLDs like “.老板”、“.鸽子”or “.时尚”?
In contrast to the trademarks that have been singled
out as an overarching issue for new gTLD implementation,
we concern that the other legal issues that are protected
by the international treaties, such as non-trademark
"traditional knowledge", would be unreasonably
ignored or push aside.
We reiterate the concerns that have been expressed
in various circumstances by the at-large communities
that ICANN should not engage in any trademark protection
regime which extends beyond existing international
intellectual property treaties and the inherent legal
limitations on the trademark rights.
Critiques to IP Clearing House and String Confusion
Proposals of the IRT Final Report
Date: July 10-August 10, 2009
Three critical reasons against the string comparison
as proposed by the IRT
a) It subverts the bottom-up consensus of the new
gTLD process.
String confusion issue was firstly researched by the
GNSO IDN WG, which eventually stated that string confusion
should be limited to visual similiarity. This is confirmed
by the GNSO document to the Board. Although the gTLD
guidebook is ambiguous on string confusion, which
only says that any string should not inflict "user
confusion", the IRT proposal should not betray
the community consensus by stretching it to "meaningful"
confusion.
b) It is legally baseless.
No international law allows for trademark protection
in translated form except for well-known marks. The
string confusion extending to commerical impression
(meaningful similarity) is equivalent to create additional
protection indiscrimatively for all the marks, which
is not acceptedly internationally.
c) It breaches free speech.
No trademark owner owns the meaning of a trademark,
let alone the meaning in any script or language. A
cross-script monopoly for words or "meaning"
of a trademark is obvously not the intent of the new
gTLD program.
Unreasonableness of IP Clearing House
It is a sham for uniform mandatory sunrise imposed
on indiscriminately on all the potential new gTLD
operators. This mandatory uniform sunrise approach
can easily be gamed. Look at the thousands of trademarks
registered in preparation for the new gTLDs. I can
see hundreds of ".music" trademarks in
various territories that can be searched and verified,
not Tunisian registrations, but why should they
be prioritized? I really want to know if such "clearing"
covers the translation of a federally registered
trademark or limited to the original mark string
per se. If it were the first case, it would almost
become a death sentence to IDNs (thinking about
the trademark flooding to game the clearing house!).
Comments to ICANN
Comments on Fast-Track IDN ccTLDs Implementation
(version 3)
http://forum.icann.org/lists/ft-implementation/msg00030.html
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 16:16:08 +0800
a) Fast-track IDN ccTLDs must be implemented as
planned, i.e. in Q4 of 2009 as the latest, to meet
the "pressing need" of non-ASCII user
community;
b) Any implementation plan must strictly observe
the IDN Guidelines and IDN tables reserved at the
ICANN. Any ignorance on variant character set would
cause serious user confusion. The present draft
policy on variants would seriously pledge the non-ASCII
users, particularly in Chinese and Japanese community,
by distorting their character usage. If the present
policy equals ASCII TLD variants in either capital
letters or low-case letters, non-ASCII users should
have the equal right to use the variant scripts
in the relevant fast-track IDN ccTLDs.
c) The cost estimated for the processing of each
new IDN ccTLD request is prohibitively high. The
financial barrier for IDN ccTLD managers especially
from developing countries would widen the digital
divide and be against the ICANN's social responsibility.
Comments on Trademark Protection (IRT Final Report)
http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-final-report/msg00138.html
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2009 11:35:47 +0800
We strongly concern the IP Clearinghouse and Globally
Protected Marks List. Trademarks have always been
protected and enforced by national law, which is
not changed by any relevant international conventions,
particularly Paris Convention or WTO TRIPS Agreement,
let alone that not every country or territory is
the members of these conventions. ICANN, in its
limited technical coordination role as declared
in its mission, has absolutely no authority to create
any international or even global law to change the
territorial nature of trademark rights. What is
recommended by IRT is to set up a private ordering
through ICANN DNS governance to create a de facto
global enforcement for trademarks, irrespective
of legal limits of trademark protection. We do believe
if ICANN go ahead with this line, it will be an
obvious mission creep of ICANN.
We assume that URS would become an unnecessary
additional layer of UDRP. Another concern over URS
is that its rapidness, which will inevitably deprive
a TLD string without even full trial of the whole
facts. This approach was even abandoned when drafting
UDRP.
IDNC_Board_Proposal.pdf
All aspects related to the implementation of non Latin scripts in the root servers of the worldwide DNS system are the subject of a number of working groups and processes throughout ICANN. The ex IDN Liaison for At Large, Hong Xue, has participated in and follows all of them.
Hong stepped down from the role of ALAC IDN Liaison from Cairo Meeting in November 2008. Her extraordinary efforts and energy in this vital work benefit our community and specifically those millions of internet users whose online experience will be enhanced so much by the introduction of Doman Names in non‐ASCII scripts.
Hong has selected for ALAC, a most worthy successor for this vital role,Sivasubramanian Muthusamy, President at ISOC India Chennai and CEO at Turiya, his appointment became effective at our 3rd Session Meeting of the ALAC on 6 November 2008 and the ALAC looks forward to the energy and enthusiasm these generous volunteers will bring to our work and activities over the next 12 months.
Do you care about these issues? Then volunteer to help new Liaison keep the community's views in front of the other constituencies in ICANN. In the first instance, subscribe to the IDN Liaison mailing list and send a message telling everyone else what about IDNs you are interested in.
Liaison Monthly Report
Draft Comments on IDN ccTLD Fast Track Draft Implementation Plan v.0.2 (4 November 2008)
As the ICANN President said at our meeting, it is important not only to voice our views but send in comments in writing. Since ALAC has always been active in the consultation and policy advice process on fast track IDN ccTLDs, I suggest take the opportunity to send in our comments before 6 December 2008. To expedite drafting, I made the 0.2 version for your review. Thanks for the inputs of Izumi and Tina and the coordination of Nick.
The public consultation on the draft Implementation Plan is now open details are available here: http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement 3 23oct08 en.htm.
ALAC Presentation on IDNs to the Board (February 14, 2008)
Individual user community reiterates the pressing need to timely implement internationalized domain names in both gTLD and ccTLD name space. The fast track approach to implement the IDN ccTLDs is indeed welcomed as a positive step moving forward. No challenge or difficulty shall prevent the fast track implementation, which is characteristic of non contentiousness, from going ahead really fast, as far as it genuinely reflects the local user community's demand on native script domain names in the specific ccTLD territory, and takes into account the stability, consistency and continuation of the registration service and the harmony with the long term solution of IDN ccTLDs for the protection of the legitimate interests of the registrants (particularlyindividual registrants).
ALAC & RALO Meeting with the Board* (October 30, 2007)
Discussions on IDNs
We emphasize the pressing need from the user community for IDNs. We support a balanced and effective fast track approach for implementation of IDN ccTLD. We welcome the new PDP proposal from the ccNSO and reiterate our strong commitment to bring the users' voices to this policy making process. Per the Board resolution at the San Juan meeting, we hereby submit the status report on IDN ccTLDs issues to the Board. The report contains our recommendations on the principles, policies and implementation of IDN ccTLDs. We primarily recommend that implementation of IDN ccTLDs comply with all the technical standards to ensure the interoperability and security and selection and accreditation of any IDN ccTLD be subject to sufficient, transparent and effective consultations in the pertinent ccTLD user community.
Given that the IDN test is going on and the IDN protocols are being reviewed, we are keen to know whether there is a timeline for implementation of IDN gTLDs under the auspices of new gTLD process.
Finally, there will be an IDN workshop from the users' prospective, which is in coordination with the ccNSO, GAC and ICANN Staffs, at the IGF.
ALAC Statement on IDNs at ICANN Public Forum, San Juan, June 28, 2007
ALAC welcomes the new technical and policy developments on IDN. ALAC supports a balanced and reasonable fast tracking approach on the IDN implementation, and we call for a more effective and formal consultant mechanism with the Internet user community in all the IDN process.
ALAC also made proposal for IDN Workshop at IGF.
At Large Policy Priorities Workshop (San Juan, June 28, 2007)
28 june 2007 ws
RESOLUTION OF THE AT LARGE COMMUNITY ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERNATIONALISED DOMAIN NAMES (IDNS) FOR THE BENEFIT OF INDIVIDUAL INTERNET USERS WORLDWIDE
al 2007 r 3
At Large Internet Users Workshop Internationalized Domain Names (Wellington, 28 March 2006)
http://icann.org/meetings/wellington/agenda idn 28mar06.htm
At Large Participation at the IGF Hydeabad
Cheryl Langdon Orr, Hong Xue led a few workshops related to IDN and other issues and were panel speakers in a few other workshops.
Cheryl Langdon Orr, V C Vivekandandan and Sivasubramanian Muthusamy were speakcers at " Lessons Learned from the Engagement and Facilitation of Internet Users into Policy Development and Processes within ICANN via the ICANN Board's At Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) ."
Cheryl was one of the panelist at the ICANN open forum.
(Cheryl and Hong Xue participated in a number of workshops, the precise deails of the theme, co speakers and presentation links are to be obtained from Hong and Cheryl and to be unploaded in the wiki.
ALAC & Yale ISP Joint Workshop on IDNs at IGF
The participation of the local Internet user community is considered necessary in the successful implementation of IDNs. This session will look at the experiences of several early adopter TLDs who may have involved the local community in the process of implementation of IDNs, to different extents, as well as users who have participated in those trials. Best practices and lessons learnt will be presented, and the discussion will focus on the practical implementation of these IDNs with the full participation of end users.
The workshop has been successfully held on Monday November 12, 2007. The Speakers talked about new IDN technical developments that will greatly benefit the users, particularly the IDN application in email system. Email and whois are the two ASCII only fortresses against the tide of IDNs. IDN email application will significantly liberate the IDN users from the chains of ASCII. The Speakers also presents the different implementation models and polices developed by the local user communities, such as Japanese speaking and Polish speaking communities. It sufficiently proves that only the local language communities can and should determine how to implement the IDNs. Hong from ALAC presented a couple of policy considerations on the IDNs. She strongly argued that failure to implement the IDNs and continuous delay have become a breach of the principle of freedome of expression of non ASCII script users. The workshop was warmly applauded by all the audience, including scores of governmental officials from 27 countries and the representatives from business sectors, civil society and academics.
ALAC Statement for the ICANN Board Request for Responses
The IDN Working Group are drafting the proposed statement and a timeline for At Large consultations and amendments is as follows:
I. Drafting the response by ALAC IDN Liaison and Members (Siavash, Hong, Veronica, Mohammed) by July 22, 2007
II. Completion of the draft answers by August 5
III. Public consultation through IDN WG list by August 17
IV. Revsion of the answers, August 31
V. Public Consultation through RALOs, September 28
VI. Revision and completion of draft report, October 13
VII. Public Comments , October 20
VIII. Completion of final report, October 2
IDNs IN THE NEWS
IDN DOCUMENTS
Other Reference Materials and Further Reading on the IDN Reference Shelf
ALAC IDN Working Group
ICANN Seeks Interest in IDN ccTLD Fast-Track Process (2 October 2008)
Cross-Constituency IDNC Working Group Finalized Its Proposal on Fast Track ccTLDs to the Board (26 June 2008)
Laison Report to ALAC/ At-Large Policy and Planning OneDay #3* (22 June 2008)
Draft Final Report of Recommendations for IDN ccTLD Fast Track Mechanism Made Available (13 June 2008)
Public Comments for ccNSO IDNC Proposal Methodology for Fast-Track IDN ccTLDs
Apply by May 26 for University of Malta accredited courses and
June 23 for Diplo certificate courses.
At the ICANN Regional Meeting in Dubai, IDNC published the amended "Proposed Methodology for Fast-Track" for public comment. It is stated it has not been signed off by the IDNC WG who will continue to provide their input. The comment period will go on until May 7. Given its enormous importance to the user community, I post the document and set up a new page to collect the public comments. If you want your voice heard, please speak out loud here!
Planning for IGF Workshop 2008
The third Internet Governance Forum (IGF)meeting is to be held in Hyderabad, India from 3-6 December 2008. This is the first IGF meeting in Asia-Pacific region. IGF is now calling for workshops, best practice forums and open forums. The deadline for submission is April 30.
Comments on Initial Draft Fast-Track Mechanism for Introduction of IDN ccTLDs (26/02/08)
ALAC & Yale ISP Joint Workshop on IDNs at IGF
The participation of the local Internet user community is considered necessary in the successful implementation of IDNs. This session will look at the experiences of several early adopter TLDs who may have involved the local community in the process of implementation of IDNs, to different extents, as well as users who have participated in those trials. Best practices and lessons learnt will be presented, and the discussion will focus on the practical implementation of these IDNs with the full participation of end-users.
ALAC Statement for the ICANN Board Request for Responses
The IDN Working Group are drafting the proposed statement and a timeline for At-Large consultations and amendments is as follows:
I. Drafting the response by ALAC IDN Liaison and Members (Siavash, Hong, Veronica, Mohammed) by July 22
II. Completion of the draft answers by August 5
III. Public consultation through IDN-WG list by August 17
IV. Revsion of the answers, August 31
V. Public Consultation through RALOs, September 28
VI. Revision and completion of draft report, October 13
VII. Public Comments , October 20
VIII. Completion of final report, October 2
IDNs IN THE NEWS
Draft Initial Report on introduction IDN ccTLD under fast track for comment (January 28, 2008)
CCNSO IDNC WG drafted the Initial report and the WG will work on it till 28 January 2008. Public Consultation will start on Feburary 4. The key issues are selection of IDN ccTLD strings and managers in fast track process. The liaison has raised the critical issue how to coordinate the fast track process with the long term solution.
Request to Provide Input to Issue Report on Introduction of IDN ccTLDs (December 19, 2007)
At its meeting on 2 October 2007, the ccNSO Council resolved to call for an Issue Report to examine the need for a Policy Development Process (ccPDP) to consider:
Whether Article IX of the ICANN bylaws applies to IDN ccTLDs associated with the ISO 3166-1 two letter codes, and if it does not then to establish if Article IX should apply.
Whether the ccNSO should launch a PDP to develop the policy for the selection and delegation of IDN ccTLDs associated with the ISO 3166-1 two-letter codes.
The Council requested that, in preparing the Issue Report, the Issue Manager identify policies, procedures, and/or by-laws that should be reviewed and, as necessary revised, in connection with the development and implementation of any IDN ccTLD policy.http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-19dec07.htm