About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

browse comments: Request for Extension (fwd)

Request for Extension (fwd)
Michael Sondow (msondow@ic.sunysb.edu)
Thu, 13 Aug 1998 13:56:51 -0400 (EDT)

Browse by: [ date ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Carlos: "DOMAIN NAME GRANT"
Previous message: Clive Boustred: "Comment from Strategize.com RE WIPO Internet Domain Name Process"


The ICIIU supports the following request for an extension of time for
responding to WIPO-RFC-1.

----------------------------------------
August 12, 1998

A-TCPIP/Domain Name Rights Coalition (DNRC) requests an extension of time for
all commenters to respond to the WIPO RFC-1 proceeding. DNRC is concerned
that the WIPO RFC-1 proceeding is not receiving the attention it deserves from
the Internet community due to the heavy staff and time obligations associated
with the worldwide IFWP Internet Governance meetings. It is clear to us that
both the Internet Governance Meetings and the WIPO RFC-1 proceeding are
important to the creation of authority and responsible policies for the
Internet and the new Entity proposed by the White Paper.

So that organizations do not have to choose between participation in the
Internet Governance meetings and participation in the WIPO RFC-1 proceeding,
DNRC requests that WIPO extend the deadline for replies to RFC-1 by at least
one week and preferably two weeks. This brief delay will not disadvantage the
WIPO process, and there is much to gain with increased participation.

We note that WIPO has yet to list its panel of experts that will be meeting to
consider the comments. The panel - which we trust will include experts on
both intellectual property and free speech/open communication - was promised
in mid-August, and in all events, should be posted at least one week prior to
the deadline for comments. We also note that current commenters to the RFC-1
have suggested flexibility in the schedule.

DNRC respectfully requests an email response to this message, in addition to
any response posted to the WIPO website.

Thank you,
Kathryn A. Kleiman
General Counsel and Co-Founder, A-TCPIP/DNRC
________________________________________________________________________________

Michael Sondow, for the ICIIU.


Next message: Carlos: "DOMAIN NAME GRANT"
Previous message: Clive Boustred: "Comment from Strategize.com RE WIPO Internet Domain Name Process"