esther,
in our conversation, you told me the board had endorsed the principles of the report.
maybe i misunderstood, but neither my notes or
my memory recall any discussion of specifid chapters being endorsed and others being
referred WITHOUT recommendation. because i had
no written info, i kept the story general and emphasized that the report was open for
change. unfortunately, michael froomkin
commented on bad info i gave him, believing that the principles of the famous marks
section were among the principles after we saw
the written release, i went back and put in comments in clearer context.
my apologies to both of you for any confusion. perhaps this is another argument for
open meetings? : )
jeri
-----Original Message-----
From: Esther Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Dave Farber
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Saturday, May 29, 1999 10:37 AM
Subject: [IFWP] feedback on NYT article
>Jeri -
>
>In our conversation on Thursday, I said to you that we had endorsed many of
>the "principles" of the WIPO report, most notably uniform dispute
>resolution, but not the specific recomemendations.
>
> I suggested that you consult the press release and resolutions for
>details, which include separate approaches to three separate
>categories/sections of the report (and which you to some extent outline
>later in the story). We did, as many public comments had advised us to,
>refer the second two categories (as opposed to approaches we had de facto
>already adopted in our registrar accreditation guidelines) to the DNSO. In
>other words, though the second paragraph of the story and subsequent details
>were better, the lede was seriously misleading. What more can I say?
>
>Unfortunately, these seemingly subtle distinctions are important. (For
>everyone: The details are at
>http://www.icann.org/berlin/berlin-resolutions.html and
>http://www.icann.org/berlin/berlin-details.html.)
>
>
>Esther
>
>
>
>
>
> May 28, 1999
>
>
> Internet Board Backs Rules to Limit
> Cybersquatters
>
> By JERI CLAUSING
>
> he board of the Internet's new oversight organization on Thursday
> endorsed a controversial set of recommendations for cracking
> down on so-called cybersquatters, who register trademarks and other
> popular words as Internet addresses.
>
> Esther Dyson, interim chairman of the organization, the Internet
> Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, emphasized that the
> board's endorsement merely affirmed the broader principles of the
> recommendations, which were issued last month by the World
> Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an arm of the United
> Nations. Many of the details, she said, would be open to amendment.
>
> The board deferred final adoption of the
> recommendations until they can be reviewed by
> one of ICANN's newly formed member groups.
> Absent from that group, however, is the
> constituency that critics say have the most to lose
> under the recommendations: individuals and
> non-commercial interests who have already
> registered Internet addresses and could have them
> taken away.
>
> Like everything surrounding the Clinton
> Administration's process for handing administration
> of the Internet to ICANN, the board's action was
> immediately criticized as contrary to its charge to
> be a "bottom's up" organization and follow the lead
> of its worldwide constituents.
>
> Brian O'Shaughnessy, a spokesman for Network Solutions Inc., which
> has held an exclusive government contract for registering names in the
> top-level domains of .com, .net and org since 1993, said after
>Thursday's
> action that ICANN was envisioned "as a limited standard-setting body
> which is consensus based." But he said that when the board begins
> making such decisions, "It's top down instead of bottoms up."
>
> A. Michael Froomkin, a University of Miami law professor who advised
> WIPO on the recommendations and who has been critical of some of its
> major provisions, said he was pleased that the ICANN endorsement
> applied only to the broader dispute resolution principles. Three other
> chapters, including that recommending that ICANN establish a system
> for protecting not only trademarks but other famous words, was
>referred
> to the membership committee without recommendation.
>
> Still, he questioned the need for the board to take any action yet.
>
> "Why are they endorsing things before they send them to the supporting
> organization for review? " he asked.
>
> The unanimous endorsement of the principles by ICANN's board came
> during an eight-hour closed board meeting in Berlin, where the board
> also finalized a $5.9 million budget that will be financed in part
>by a $1 a
> year fee on every domain name registered and on fees and dues from
> companies ICANN approves to begin competing with Network
> Solutions.
>
> In addition, the board approved the structure of two of three
>supporting
> groups that will make up the nonprofit corporation's membership.
>
> One of those three is the Domain Name Supporting Organization
> (DNSO), which has been charged with making recommendations to
> ICANN on how and when to add new top-level domains like .com to
> the global network.
>
> Its first order of business, however, is to carry out rules
>governing the
> registration of domain names. Specifically, ICANN asked the new group
> to begin drafting a plan on how to move forward with the WIPO
> recommendations.
>
> "It's clear that this is urgent so we sent that right to the DNSO
>saying that
> we basically support the WIPO report but there are issues about how to
> implement it," Dyson said.
>
> The WIPO proposal has been criticized as favoring trademark holders
> and wealthy corporate interests over small businesses, nonprofit
>groups
> and individual Internet users.
>
> Although the board action is an official endorsement of the WIPO
> principals, Dyson said the recommendations are still "very much" open
> for change by the domain name supporting organization.
>
> But that group is still lacking one of its seven constituencies:
>the group
> that is supposed to represent individual and non-commercial domain
> name holders. The other six constituencies - representing groups like
> trademark holders, registries and Internet service providers - were
> approved by the board Thursday.
>
> "These guys are stragglers," Dyson said. "They basically did not come
> together with a proposal. We hope to have that resolved in June. We
> told them to come back to us."
>
> Despite the missing link, Dyson said the DNSO has been asked to begin
> work immediately on the WIPO report so that the board can adopt some
> of its provisions at its next board meeting in Santiago, Chile, in
>August.
>
> ICANN on Thursday also accepted
> an application for the Protocol
> Supporting Organization, which will
> deal with more technical aspects of
> the Internet's architecture. It expects
> to formally recognize a third group,
> the Address Supporting Organization
> in Santiago.
>
> Thursday's board meeting - the third formal meeting of the interim
> ICANN board -- followed a daylong public hearing where the board
> took comment on all of the items on its closed meeting agenda. It also
> discussed the progress, or lack thereof, in opening the domain name
> registration business to competition.
>
> ICANN was formed last year to take over the administrative
>functions of
> the Internet that previously were conducted by government contractors
> and to open the registration process to competition. Last month it
>chose
> the first five companies to test a shared registration system built by
> Network Solutions.
>
> The test phase officially began April 26, but none of the five
>companies
> has yet been able to go live and begin registering names in the
>top-level
> domains of .com, .net and org.
>
> Ken Stubbs, who represents the only nonprofit entity participating
>in the
> test, the Internet Council of Registrars, complained to the board that
> important software from Network Solutions does not work, and that the
> non-disclosure agreement Network Solutions made the test participants
> sign prohibits them from discussing the test problems with ICANN.
>
> Dyson said she was disturbed by Stubbs comments.
>
> "My goal had been for the test to be a source of information not
>just for
> the people directly involved in the test but for everyone who
>wants to be
> a registrar down the road," she said.
>
> O'Shaughnessy said the non-disclosure agreement was a standard
> contract meant to protect the company's proprietary information.
>
> "There is nothing particularly unique about it," he said. "They
>are holding
> it up as if it's restrictive, but it's a standard NDA.
>
> The reason the test information has not yet been shared with ICANN is
> simple, O'Shaughnessy said: "ICANN hasn't signed the non-disclosure
> agreement."
>
>
>Esther Dyson Always make new mistakes!
>chairman, EDventure Holdings
>interim chairman, Internet Corp. for Assigned Names & Numbers
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>1 (212) 924-8800
>1 (212) 924-0240 fax
>104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor)
>New York, NY 10011 USA
>http://www.edventure.com http://www.icann.org
>
>High-Tech Forum in Europe: 24 to 26 October 1999, Budapest
>PC Forum: March 12 to 15, 2000, Scottsdale (Phoenix), Arizona
>Book: "Release 2.0: A design for living in the digital age"
>
>
>
