The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) – the body mandated with the technical management and co-ordination of the Internet – undervalues non-commercial interests in the policy development process, says a 2006 report by the London School of Economics.
Non-commercial internet users have long fought for parity with commercial users in the policy development process.
Interestingly, its coming just before ICANN releases new types of domain names next year, technically called “generic-Top-Level-Domain”(or gTLD). Unlike the current three-letter .com .org or .net their name-like suffixes, like .nation .sun .people .orange or .africa – increase names availability, diversity and choice.
Countries and territories like .kenya are protected by the International Organisation for Standardization ISO 3166-1. Countries with advanced intellectual property frameworks will dominate name allocations if proposed IRT recommendations are adopted - pushing locally registered firms off the Internet.
A Kenyan company, say, Micro-Soft may prevent Microsoft Corporation from registering a similarly ‘sounding’ name at local registrar of companies.
But according to the IRT report, the local company, if not on proposed ICANN “IP Clearinghouse” database and .microsoft was, may be denied the right to own internationally ‘similarly sounding’ .micro-soft, if not accused of ‘counterfeiting’ the, domain name.
Besides costs, consider our inadequate or absent online database register of technology patents, trademarks ‘Famous Marks’, traditional symbols, languages phrases, inherited words and phrases- spoken but not written, and traditional knowledge passed trough generations. If they are patented abroad, we many never use those names since no mechanism protects it.
Disputes include kiondo and kikoy both of which have generated heated debate both locally and internationally over what we regard as “theft” of our cultural heritage by developed countries.
Kikoy was in the news when a company in UK applied to register the word KIKOY as a trade mark - UK trade mark application number 2431257 an intended registration halted after an opposition was filed.
Foreseeing competitions for ‘nice’ domain names, multi-claims and conflicts between brand/trade names owners (‘Intellectual Property Constituency’ group) versus language words/public interest (‘Noncommercial Users’ group) presented new headaches to the ICANN Board.
Comprising ICANN staff, Intellectual Property Constituency, and “internationally diverse group of persons with knowledge, expertise, and experience in the fields of trademark, consumer protection, or competition law, and the interplay of trademarks and the domain name system to develop and propose solutions to the overarching issue of trademark protection in connection with the introduction of new gTLDs.”
Drafted behind closed doors by a group of trademark attorneys who represent the world’s largest trademark owners and without any representation of domain name registrants., they are proposing to re-define ICANN’s bylaws mandate – the technical management of the Internet system.
Biased consideration of only domain abuses in protecting online brands, yet ignored “trademark lawyer abuse” (similar to local “ambulance chaser lawyers”) - little wonder their report says, “The views of the IRT reflect the views of business and trademark interests in general.”
Largest companies and trademark owners are expanding trademark rights in all new domain names -rights not bounded by the traditional limits of trademark law, not bounded by fair use, free speech or freedom of expression.
The recommended ICANN becomes an Intellectual Property “Clearinghouse” responsible for protecting brand owners interests.
That ICANN becomes an international Intellectual Property protector - overriding national laws. Proposed creation of already opposed “Thick Whois”- a publicly visible database of domain owners - without doing a privacy analysis, nor taking into account national laws nor International Privacy Standards, such as 1980 OECD.
Contrary to national laws, the IRT report burdens Internet users with costs of protecting private Intellectual Property. ICANN derives its revenues from users thus if adopted the “IP Clearing house” administration costs will be borne by consumers.
PAYE Tax Calculator
Note: The results are not exact but very close to the actual.
