Digital Rights + Internet Governance + Innovation Policy

NCUC Statement on Draft GNSO New GTLD Policy Recommendations

"... Our overall concern remains that despite platitudes to certain, transparent and predictable criteria—the GNSO’s draft recommendations create arbitrary vetoes and excessive challenges to applications. There are some for incumbents; for trademark rights holders; for the easily offended, for repressive governments and worst of all, for “the public”. Among the more troubling proposals is the introduction of criteria in which strings must be ‘morally’ acceptable and not contrary to ‘public order’. A concept borrowed from trademark law without precedent in the regulation of non-commercial speech. NCUC opposes any string criteria related to ‘morality’ or ‘public order’ as beyond ICANN’s technical mandate...."

“Keep the Core Neutral” Civil Society Workshop at ICANN Board Meeting 27 June in San Juan

Civil society's "Keep the Core Neutral" workshop will explore freedom of expression issues in the policy development process to introduce new generic top-level domains (gtlds)? As the ICANN community debates policy options to allow new top-level domains, it must consider important issues that impact what ideas may be expressed in a domain name. The workshop aims to provide a public discussion point in the ICANN policy development process for new top-level domains.

Legal Briefing Paper from Law Professor Christine Haight Farley on GNSO Recommendations for Domain Name Policy

Before I make observations specific to these recommendations, I would like to offer some general remarks about the overall incongruence between trademarks and domain names. It is important to note at the outset this general lack of equivalence between trademark law and domain name policy. For instance, trademark law the world over is fundamentally based on the concept of territoriality. Thus trademark law seeks to protect regionally and market-based marks without implication for the protection or availability of that mark in another region. In contrast, domain names have global reach, are accessible everywhere and have implications for speech around the world. ...

Legal Briefing Paper from Law Professor Jacqueline Lipton on GNSO Recommendations for Domain Name Policy

"... It is important to start re-focusing the regulation of the Internet domain name system generally on interests outside of pure trademark interests. The introduction of new gTLDs and the development of processes for introducing them may provide a good opportunity for achieving this goal. However, any attempt to regulate broad policy issues relating to social and cultural norms on speech, public order and morality in domain names will be very difficult for any national or international body or group. ICANN also faces the practical difficulty that its major area of expertise is technical and functional. It is therefore important for ICANN to clarify what groups, bodies or individuals it might utilize in carrying out future legal and social developments within development of its domain name processes. In particular, ICANN should consider more specifically who to consult in formalizing specific processes for: (a) the introduction of new gTLD strings; (b) establishing dispute resolution procedures for those strings; and, (c) deciding whether the introduction of particular new strings should be deferred or rejected...."

NCUC Proposes Amendments to Protect Free Expression in Domain Name Policy at ICANN

ICANN's Non-Commercial User's Constituency (NCUC) introduced 5 proposals to amend the draft GNSO recommendations for a policy to introduce new generic top-level domains (gtlds). NCUC's amendments are intended to provide some recognition of respect for freedom of expression rights in the GNSO recommendations. NCUC proposes that ICANN keep the core neutral of national, regional, moral, and religious policy conflicts. The current draft GNSO recommendations would not permit a controversial or offensive word to be included in a top-level Internet domain name and would expand the rights of trademark owners on the Internet.

Free Expression Threatened by Policy to Ban Controversial Ideas in Domain Names

ICANN’s current proposal for evaluating new top-level domains will result in massive censorship on the Internet, since controversial or offensive ideas will not be allowed in a top-level domain. And the proposal vastly expands the rights of large trademark holders to control the use of language on the Internet, well beyond what US or international trademark law grants to trademark owners. ICANN’s historical practice of deferring to the intellectual property lobby in setting global domain name policy has consistently provided ammunition to those who would question ICANN’s legitimacy and its ability to govern in the global public interest. ICANN will continue to grapple with a perception of illegitimacy, particularly from the developing world, as long as it operates for the benefit of narrow special interests, while disregarding fundamental freedoms in its policy development process. For ICANN to remain the appropriate international forum to be entrusted with managing the Internet’s root server, ICANN must stick to its narrow technical mission and keep the core neutral on national policy issues.

A2K@IGF Dynamic Coalition Statement at IGF Open Consultation May 2007

"... Build freedom of expression values into the laws and architectures that support online communication. The Internet was originally designed primarily for communication and educational purposes. The ability to communicate across the globe without any intermediary’s interference, to seek out desired knowledge, and freely associate with ideas and communities close to one’s heart, are at the core of what makes the Internet such a powerful tool for development. These specific early infrastructural design choices remain key to the Internet’s contribution as a global resource for knowledge and development. We can bridge the gap in the digital divide by continuing to design the Internet with these ends in mind, and implement technical protocols and public policy choices that encourage the Internet as a tool of unencumbered free expression and access to knowledge. If we choose anything other than an “Internet for Development”, we are building a wall that serves to widen the gap between those with a wealth of information at their fingertips and those starved for knowledge. ..."

Statement of American Bar Association at IGF Open Consultation

Statement of American Bar Association delivered by Henry Judy at the United Nations Internet Governance Forum (IGF) 23 May 2007 - Geneva CHAIRMAN DESAI:  Thank you very much. Can I now turn to Henry Judy of the American Bar Association? HENRY JUDY:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  My name is Henry Judy.  I'm with the American [...]

A2K@IGF Dynamic Coalition Statement at IGF Open Consultation

I speak on behalf of the A2K@IGF Dynamic Coalition, who’s purpose is to support and expand Access to Knowledge and promote freedom of expression in the realm of information and communication technology. Our coalition is particularly concerned with the impact that unbalanced intellectual property rights have on the Internet as a tool of free expression, innovation, education, and development. A2K@IGF joins in supporting the statement from Brazil and Argentina this morning to focus the openness theme on fundamental rights and open standards, and the diversity theme on knowledge production and sharing. ...

Report on WIPO in 2007 Global Information Society Watch

By Robin Gross. New leadership is needed at WIPO in key positions, like the chairmanship of WIPO’s copyright committee. The WIPO delegates themselves must hold WIPO accountable for its actions, by refusing to re-elect leaders who consistently ignore the explicit instructions of the WIPO General Assembly to pursue their own agenda. The proposed Broadcasting Treaty could not be a better example - where the WIPO General Assembly has told the WIPO Copyright Committee Chair Jukka Liedes that the proposed Broadcasting Treaty should be a “signal-based” approach, which still protects broadcasts from theft without creating a new set of exclusive rights. Yet Liedes continues to draft the proposals for the treaty with his preferred approach of creating new intellectual property rights for broadcasting companies. ....

Signup for the Latest News



Copyright 2022 IP Justice | All Rights Reserved

Go to Top