At 9:49 AM +0300 7/15/09, Bill Kagai wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 8:43 PM, Gakuru Alex<alexgakuru.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
1. Disclosure within ICANN:
[Of big brand owners and 'Intellectual Property" industry oiling ICANN domain name policy making process - to the detriment of people like us, in Kenya, and Africa. Countries that do not have well established digital IP laws, "Famous Marks" registries, and poor, if any, software and IT innovations patent system. If just continue sitting back and allow ICANN be influenced by wealthy IP interests, then expect those IP interests to patent/copyright even our traditional languages such that we cannot have our cultures nor use languages over the internet.
Chief, Even latin is not this hard to comprehend. Maybe you should consider simple language (with pictures) to pass your message.
The IRT (Implementation Recommendation Team) was set up to produce a report making recommendations about trademark protections in new gTLDs. ICANN is currently deciding how to introduce new gTLDs, probably a lot of new gTLDs, the IRT is part of that. Like most ICANN processes it is complex, it has developed through a series of rolling public comments and consultations (all ICANN processes take time and are complicated, it's a cost of the transparency and inclusiveness the organization attempts to follow.) My views on this are somewhat bias, I'm a member of NCUC and ALAC, but I have found the IRT process rushed and to unfairly favor the interests of those who wish to strengthen the intellectual property protections enjoyed by trademark holders. As KICTANet is a multistakeholder list, I expect some may disagree with me :-) More information about the IRT process: <http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-4-29may09-en.htm> Two statements that I think summarize the common concerns of non-commercial interests and end users: Joint Non Commercial Users (NCUC) At Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) statement on the IRT <https://st.icann.org/gnso-liaison/index.cgi?joint_statement_on_the_irt_report_from_alac_and_ncuc> ALAC statement: <https://st.icann.org/alac-docs/index.cgi?statement_of_the_alac_on_the_irt_s_final_report_al_alac_st_0609_1_rev1> Both statements quite short. But there's no simple way I can think of to fully understand the process, other than to slog through reading a lot of quite dry documents. Perhaps KICTANet could consider joining ICANN's At Large? See <http://www.atlarge.icann.org/> Hope this helps. Adam
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
This message was sent to: ajp@glocom.ac.jp Unsubscribe or change your options at http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/ajp%40glocom.ac.jp