browse comments: New RFC-1

New RFC-1
mheltzer@inta.org
Wed, 19 Aug 98 09:07:01 -0500

Browse by: [ date ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: iad@email.jpo-miti.go.jp: "WIPO RFC-1"
Previous message: Ross.Wilson@ipaustralia.gov.au: "Comments on Terms of Reference"

August 17, 1998

Mr. Christopher Gibson
World Intellectual Property Organization ("WIPO")
34 chemin des Colombettes
P.O. Box 18
1211 Geneva 20
Switzerland

Re: Request for Comments on Terms of Reference, Procedures and Timetable for the
WIPO Internet Domain Name Process

Dear Mr. Gibson:

The International Trademark Association ("INTA") welcomes WIPO's initiative
in commencing an international process to develop recommendations
regarding certain intellectual property issues associated with Internet domain
names. This initiative is in response to the invitation in the United States
Government's White Paper on the "Management of Internet Names and Addresses".

Terms of Reference

INTA supports the comprehensive scope of the "Draft Terms of Reference"
included in rfc-1. The concerns of interested parties are wide-ranging.
Proposals for changes in domain name administration will have a significant
influence on the future utility of the Internet and on existing rights relating
to the use of names in the real world. It is essential, therefore, that the
potential impact of any such changes should be considered in depth and through
an open and inclusive process of inquiry and analysis covering all relevant
issues and taking input from all interested parties.

The "Introductory Remarks" to rfc-1 indicate that the WIPO process will take
full account of earlier contributions made in the course of previous discussions
on these issues. Clearly this must include WIPO's own substantial work in
support of the POC/gTLD-MoU proposals for dispute resolution and other similar
initiatives WIPO has itself undertaken elsewhere (e.g. with Internet One).

Procedures

INTA considers that WIPO's intention to constitute an internationally
representative panel of experts from critical disciplines to assist in the
formulation of detailed recommendations is an appropriate way to manage the
process. Clearly, the selection of the panel of experts will be
critical to the success of the WIPO Process. The rfc does not indicate how the
selection
will be made. INTA believes that it will be important for the credibility of
the "process" that participants should be sought openly from the stakeholder
groups with a direct interest in the relevant intellectual property issues. It
will also be important that the participants should
have sufficient knowledge and experience of the contentious issues involved.

INTA also endorses WIPO's proposal to undertake wide ranging consultations
both on-line and by holding regional hearings in a large number of locations
around the world. The Internet is intrinsically an international communications
medium, and it is essential that stakeholders everywhere are given the
opportunity to participate fully in the process.

Timetable

The timetable proposed by WIPO is very tight. INTA recognizes why WIPO has
proposed such a short time scale and acknowledges the pressures on WIPO to come
forward with recommendations as soon as practicable. There will doubtless be
similar pressures on the new corporation which is planned to take over the
relevant administrative responsibilities after September 30, 1998. As
expressly noted in the WIPO rfc-1, WIPO will need to cooperate
closely and coordinate its work with the new corporation. INTA believes that
the present timetable probably provides the minimum possible time for the
process to be meaningful and to allow for all the proposed meetings and
consultations. Accordingly, INTA would itself suggest that the WIPO timetable
should be considered as flexible and open to possible extension or modification
in consultation with the new corporation in due course.

Sincerely,

Michael E. Heltzer
Government Relations Program Coordinator