Milton,
You wrote:
<snip>
> You are not correct, I believe, in then
> jumping to the conclusion that TM interests must be given privileged
> membership
> status in a DNSO.
>
If this is a possible reading of my post, I apologize for lack of clarity.
My position is that, if we assume that we will be using constituencies (or
SIGs, or classes of Membership) to identify the different interests,
Trademark should be included.
This, of course, does not imply that they need to have 3 seats in the
Council, but just that they need to be recognized as a valid group of
interest.
<snip>
> Do you understand the point I am making? It is not that TM holders
> shouldn't
> participate, be listened to, or be protected. It is that membership
> classes must
> not be structured to reflect particular policy positions.
>
I think I understand the point, but I don't see an alternative. To keep them
out will be, IMHO, a big mistake. To have a membership class to cater for
this type of interest will allow them to have a voice in the DNSO. Of
course, we have to find a way to properly balance this voice with
everybody's else voice.
<snip>
> The TM interests are amply represented by WIPO and by trade organizations
> and
> lobbyists in every developed country. As commercial members of a DNSO, and
> as
> general members of ICANN, they can and will make their presence felt.
> There is
> no justification for creating a special membership class that makes their
> interests more important than other interests.
>
It is not a matter of making them more important than the others, it is to
guarantee them right of citizenship.
The Registrars as well can be commercial members of the DNSO, and general
members of ICANN, but nobody is questioning their right to an explicit
collocation in a constituency.
> I understand the risks and problems associated with telling TM interests
> this
> fact. They have decided they have a right to guaranteed representation.
> They
> want to turn the DNSO and ICANN into international regulatory agencies
> that
> police trademarks in a more efficient, centralized way than the normal
> legal
> channels. Someone must have the courage to tell them that this is not
> going to
> happen. This will not make them happy. But if you grant their wishes you
> will
> alienate large sectors of the registrar, registry, and user communities. I
> guarantee it.
>
You got the point, Milton.
As you point out, there is a conflict of interest between Registrars,
Registries, User Communities and Trademarks/Commercial interests.
To put in place a structure in which some, but not all, will have rights to
have their voice heard via a specific constituency will be sheer injustice
(and probably never accepted by ICANN).
The very fact that the current DNSO proposal has 9 seats for the Council
"granted" to Registrars and Registries should suggest the idea of who, if
somebody, is trying to grab the power.
In fact, things are not so bad, because in Monterrey the constituency that
had the majority of the attendees (the Registries) agreed on right of
citizenship for the Trademarks. The disagreement was only on the figures.
<snip>
> Then get rid of membership classes altogether, or make them very simple,
> such as
> commercial, non-commercial, network operators.
>
Very good.
I already said that I am looking with great interest to Onno's proposal on
this list, which is different from yours but goes in the same direction.
But the solution cannot be imposed, as you seemed to suggest in one of your
postings, with few strokes of the pen, because it's not you or me who
decides, it's the participants to the discussion.
The whole consensus building process is built around this principle.
What I may suggest is that you join the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list and bring your
ideas there: you may succeed in convincing some other people, and that's the
beginning of a consensus.
Regards
Roberto
P.S.: Bring your friends too. The more, the merrier.
__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________
