34
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − + Line 8:
Line 8: − + − + − + Line 29:
Line 29: − + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Intellectual Property Constituency (view source)
Revision as of 17:56, 17 February 2015
, 9 years agoUpdate officers and list of public comments
The '''Intellectual Property Interests Constituency''' ('''IPC''') is one of the constituencies that was established under the [[Commercial Stakeholder Group]], which is a part of the [[Non-Contracted Parties House]] in [[ICANN]]'s [[GNSO|Generic Names Supporting Organization]] (GNSO) set forth by the [[ICANN Bylaws]]. It was constituted on December 15, 2002.
The '''Intellectual Property Interests Constituency''' ('''IPC''') is one of the constituencies comprising the [[Commercial Stakeholder Group]], which is a part of the [[Non-Contracted Parties House]] in [[ICANN]]'s [[GNSO|Generic Names Supporting Organization]] (GNSO) set forth by the [[ICANN Bylaws]]. It was constituted on December 15, 2002.
The IPC's main objective is to represent the views and interests of the [[Intellectual Property]] owners around the world particularly their trademarks, copyrights and other intellectual property rights and their effects and interaction with the [[DNS|Domain Name System]] (DNS). The constituency is expected to incorporate their views in the recommendations from the [[GNSO]] to the [[ICANN Board]].<ref>[http://www.ipconstituency.org/bylaws/ IPC Bylaws]</ref>
The IPC's main objective is to represent the views and interests of the [[Intellectual Property]] owners around the world particularly their trademarks, copyrights and other intellectual property rights and their effects and interaction with the [[DNS|Domain Name System]] (DNS). The constituency is expected to incorporate their views in the recommendations from the [[GNSO]] to the [[ICANN Board]].<ref>[http://www.ipconstituency.org/bylaws/ IPC Bylaws]</ref>
===Officers===
===Officers===
* [[Kristina Rosette]], President
* [[Greg Shatan]], President
* [[Steve Metalitz]], Vice President
* [[Steve Metalitz]], Vice President
* [[Mark Partridge]], Treasurer
* [[Michael Adams]], Treasurer
* [[Claudio Di Gangi]], Secretary
* [[Claudio Di Gangi]], Secretary
* [[Brian Winterfeldt]], GNSO Council Representative
* [[Brian Winterfeldt]], GNSO Council Representative
* [[Petter Rindforth]] (Europe), GNSO Council Representative
* [[Heather Forrest]] (Asia Pacific), GNSO Council Representative
===IPC Council===
===IPC Council===
==Position Statements on ICANN Policy Issues==
==Position Statements on ICANN Policy Issues==
The Intellectual Property Constituency provides the position statements and the recommendations of its members for virtually every [[ICANN]] policy issue. In 2010, IPC submitted its position papers regarding:
The Intellectual Property Constituency provides the position statements and the recommendations of its members for virtually every [[ICANN]] policy issue. In 2011-2014, the IPC submitted the following public comments:
* IPC Comments on the Meeting Strategy Working Group Recommendations(September 18, 2014)
* IPC Reply Comments on the ICANN Staff Paper On WhoIs Conflicts Procedure(August 1, 2014)
* IPC Comments on the German Data Retention Waiver(June 20, 2014)
* IPC Comments on Black Knight Data Retention Waiver(June 6, 2014)
* IPC Comments on the IRD Interim Report(May 27, 2014)
* IPC Comments on the Draft WhoIs Implementation Plan(April 23, 2014)
* IPC Comments on Draft Recommendations of the Accountability and Transparency Review Team 2(December 13, 2013)
* IPC Reply Comments on the RPM Requirements(September 18, 2013)
* IPC Reply Comments on the Proposal to Mitigate Name Collision(September 17, 2013)
* IPC Comments on the Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services Initial Report(September 6, 2013)
* IPC Comments on the Structures Charter Amendment Process(August 28, 2013)
* IPC Comments on Rights Protection Mechanism Requirements(August 27, 2013)
* Reply Comments of the IPC on .ORG Renewal(August 8, 2013)
* Reply Comments of the IPC on the Thick Whois Initial Report(August 2, 2013)
* Reply Comments of the IPC on ICANN FY 2014 Operating Plan and Budget(June 21, 2013)
* IPC Comments on the WhoIs Information Status Policy(May 31, 2013)
* IPC Comments on Trademark Strawman and LPR Mechanism(January 15, 2013)
* IPC Comments on Renewal of .com Registry Agreement(April 26, 2012)
* IPC Comments on Revised Conflicts of Interest Policy(April 24, 2012)
* IPC Comments on Proposed Protections for the International Red Cross and International Olympic Committee in New gTLDs(April 9, 2012)
* IPC Comments on WhoIs Review Team Report(March 23, 2012)
* IPC Comments on FY13 Budget Framework(February 23, 2012)
* IPC Comments on .cat WhoIs Proposal(February 10, 2012)
* IPC Comments on Preliminary Issues Report on RAA Amendments(January 13, 2012)
* IPC Comments on New gTLD Applicant Support Program(January 10, 2012)
* IPC Comments on Thick WhoIs Preliminary Issues Report ( December 30, 2011)
* IPC Comments on ICANN Draft_Strategic Plan(November 17, 2011)
* Phase II of Public Comments Process Enhancements-IPC Reply Comments(October 15, 2011)
* IPC Comments on Joint Applicant Support Working Group (July 29, 2011)
* IPC Comments on the Whois Review Team Discussion Paper(July 23, 2011)
* IPC Comments on the UDRP PDP (July 15, 2011)
* IPC comments on new gTLD Draft Communications Plan(July 15, 2011)
* IPC comments on FY 12 budget(June 16, 2011)
* IPC Comments on the Applicant Guidebook - April 2011 Discussion Draft (May 15, 2011)
* IP Comments on the .Net renewal agreement (May 10, 2011)
* IPC Comments on the Proposed Final Report of the PEDNR Working Group(April 21, 2011)
* IPC Comments On WhoIs RT(March 17, 2011)
* IPC comments on interim report IRDWG (March 14, 2011)
* IPC comments FY12 budget framework(March 14, 2011)
In 2010, IPC submitted its position papers regarding:
* The Procedure for Board Seat 13- IPC did not object on the timetable, however with regards to the subject matter on leaving the all the other issues related to the selection of Board Seat to be decided by the Contracted Party House, IPC requested a parity for the Non-contracted Party House. According to IPC, the Non-contracted Party House should also be allowed to decide how to fill Board seat 14 the following year and shouldn't be required to follow the strategy of the Contracted Party House for seat 13. The constituency emphasized that allowing each House to decide separately how to fill a seat on the ICANN Board is a positive improvement which paved the way to remove party dominance in a contrctual relationship with ICANN regarding GNSO's selection of board members. <ref>[http://ipconstituency.org/PDFs/2010_Feb18_Comments_on_procedure_for_Board_Seat_13.pdf GNSO Operating Procedures on the 2010 Selection Process for ICANN Board Seat 13]</ref>
* The Procedure for Board Seat 13- IPC did not object on the timetable, however with regards to the subject matter on leaving the all the other issues related to the selection of Board Seat to be decided by the Contracted Party House, IPC requested a parity for the Non-contracted Party House. According to IPC, the Non-contracted Party House should also be allowed to decide how to fill Board seat 14 the following year and shouldn't be required to follow the strategy of the Contracted Party House for seat 13. The constituency emphasized that allowing each House to decide separately how to fill a seat on the ICANN Board is a positive improvement which paved the way to remove party dominance in a contrctual relationship with ICANN regarding GNSO's selection of board members. <ref>[http://ipconstituency.org/PDFs/2010_Feb18_Comments_on_procedure_for_Board_Seat_13.pdf GNSO Operating Procedures on the 2010 Selection Process for ICANN Board Seat 13]</ref>
* Its Comments for ICANN on Expressions of Interest- IPC strongly expressed its concern regarding ICANN's proposal to implement new [[gTLD]]s without addressing the major issues such as the rights protection, economic impact of new gTLDs, malicious conduct, security and stability (root scaling) and neutral integration, ways on how to solve string contention, the need to impose restrictions to prevent speculation/gaming of Expression of Interest (EOI) etc. IPC also commented that there should be plans to implement effective strategies to protect rights and prevent trademark abuses. IPC strongly recommend to ICANN that these major issues should be resolved first before opening any EOI.<ref>[http://ipconstituency.org/PDFs/2010_Jan27_IPC_EOI_Comments.PDF Comments for ICANN Expression of Interest]</ref>
* Its Comments for ICANN on Expressions of Interest- IPC strongly expressed its concern regarding ICANN's proposal to implement new [[gTLD]]s without addressing the major issues such as the rights protection, economic impact of new gTLDs, malicious conduct, security and stability (root scaling) and neutral integration, ways on how to solve string contention, the need to impose restrictions to prevent speculation/gaming of Expression of Interest (EOI) etc. IPC also commented that there should be plans to implement effective strategies to protect rights and prevent trademark abuses. IPC strongly recommend to ICANN that these major issues should be resolved first before opening any EOI.<ref>[http://ipconstituency.org/PDFs/2010_Jan27_IPC_EOI_Comments.PDF Comments for ICANN Expression of Interest]</ref>