Difference between revisions of "ICANN 03"

From ICANNWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{ICANNMeetings|
 
{{ICANNMeetings|
 
| logo            = ICANNLogo.png
 
| logo            = ICANNLogo.png
−
| dates          = 23rd - 26th August 2009
+
| dates          = August 23-26, 2009
−
| location        = Santiago
+
| location        = Santiago, Chile
−
| host            = Chile
+
| website      = [http://www.icann.org/en/meetings/santiago/ ICANN 3]
−
| venue          = College of Economic Sciences, University of Chile,
 
−
Crowne Plaza Hotel
 
−
| website      = [http://www.icann.org/en/meetings/santiago/ ICANN 3 Site]
 
 
| totalregistrants =
 
| totalregistrants =
 
| registration    =
 
| registration    =
 
| keyappointments      =  
 
| keyappointments      =  
−
| historicalimport      = The Current only meeting to be held in Santiago
+
| historicalimport      = [[UDPR]] adopted,
 
}}
 
}}
−
'''ICANN 3''' was held in Santiago, between the 23rd August to the 26th August. There were to be many important topics to be discussed over the days ths meeting was held. [[ICANN]] 3 followed the same layout in which the two previous meetings were to held, and many of these meetings were broadcast live over the internet. All meetings were held in the same venue, the College of Economic Sciences, The University of Chile <ref>[http://www.fen.uchile.cl/]</ref>.
+
'''ICANN 3''' was held in Santiago, Chile, in August 1999. The meeting followed the same structure as previous meetings, and many of the sessions were broadcast over the Internet. All meetings were held at the College of Economic Sciences of the University of Chile <ref>[http://www.fen.uchile.cl/]</ref>.
  
−
To date this is the only [[ICANN]] meeting that has been held in this state and this country, however with many ICANN meetings planned for the future, there is a chance that once again ICANN will make an apearence in this Location.
+
==UDRP==
−
 
+
The board took further steps in the creation of the [[Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy]], approving the implementation of such a policy and offering the following guidance:
−
==Meeting==
 
−
 
 
−
This [[ICANN]] event lasted for four days, however the meetings that were planned had started on day 2 of the events programme. On the first day, the majority of the meetings were held from the DNSO constituency Group, and subjects of these meetings inlcuded Anti counterfieting interests and also commercial and buisness entitys.
 
−
 
 
−
On the second ay of this [[ICANN]] event, the ICANN public meeting took place. Menbers of ICANN and of the general public came together to discuss several issues, that were a casue for concern. This meeting featured several reportd form the DNSO, including reports on geographical diversitys, Constituency group information and also a general public forum to conclude the meeting at the end of the day.
 
−
 
 
−
On the final day of the event, was too hol the [[ICANN]] board meeting. ALtohugh the meeting was for board members only, there was the option to witness the metting over the internet or through pubic observation. The final afternoon of ''ICANN 3'' held the DNSOnames council meeting, which again was open for a public observation.
 
−
 
 
−
The Event was reported as a sucsessful event, and a good variety of subjects were discussed during the days of all mettings planned.
 
−
 
 
−
A final and complete agenda along with the online archives of the meeting can be found here [http://archive.icann.org/en/meetings/santiago/]
 
−
 
 
−
==Developments==
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
* The ICANN board accepted the [[DNSO]]'s recommendation that [[ICANN]] was able to adopt a uniform dispute resolution policy for accredited registrars for top level domains.
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
*The ICANN board had also provided guidence towards the implementation and the preperation if the following documents -
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
1. The registrars' Model Dispute Resolution Policy should be used as a starting point;
 
−
 
 
−
2. The President or his delegate should convene a small drafting committee including persons selected by him to express views and consider the interests of the registrar, non-commercial, individual, intellectual property, and business interests;
 
−
 
 
−
3. In addition to the factors mentioned in paragraph 171(2) of the WIPO report, the following should be considered in determining whether a domain name was registered in bad faith:  
 
−
 
 
−
a) Whether the domain name holder is making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the mark, without intent to misleadingly divert consumers for commercial gain or to tarnish the mark
 
−
 
 
−
(b) Whether the domain name holder (including individuals, businesses, and other organizations) is commonly known by the domain name, even if the holder has acquired no trademark or service mark rights; and
 
  
 +
# The registrars' Model Dispute Resolution Policy should be used as a starting point;
 +
# The President or his delegate should convene a small drafting committee including persons selected by him to express views and consider the interests of the registrar, non-commercial, individual, intellectual property, and business interests;
 +
# In addition to the factors mentioned in paragraph 171(2) of the WIPO report, the following should be considered in determining whether a domain name was registered in bad faith:<br />
 +
a) Whether the domain name holder is making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the mark, without intent to misleadingly divert consumers for commercial gain or to tarnish the mark;<br />
 +
(b) Whether the domain name holder (including individuals, businesses, and other organizations) is commonly known by the domain name, even if the holder has acquired no trademark or service mark rights; and <br />
 
(c) Whether, in seeking payment for transfer of the domain name, the domain name holder has limited its request for payment to its out-of-pocket costs.  
 
(c) Whether, in seeking payment for transfer of the domain name, the domain name holder has limited its request for payment to its out-of-pocket costs.  
−
 
+
# There should be a general parity between the appeal rights of complainants and domain name holders; and
−
4. There should be a general parity between the appeal rights of complainants and domain name holders.
+
# The dispute policy should seek to define and minimize reverse domain name hijacking.
−
 
 
−
5. The dispute policy should seek to define and minimize reverse domain name hijacking;
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
*The AT large directors was no able to consist of no more than 18 members, all of which were to be selected by already serving members of the [[ICANN]] commitee.
 
−
 
 
  
 
==Historical Notes==
 
==Historical Notes==
−
 
  
 
* The Board of directors at the time of [[ICANN]] 3 were as follows: [[Esther Dyson]] (Interim Chairman), Geraldine Capdeboscq, George Conrades, [[Greg Crew]], Frank Fitzsimmons,Hans Kraaijenbrink, [[Jun Murai]], [[Mike Roberts|Michael Roberts]],Eugenio Triana, and Linda S. Wilson.
 
* The Board of directors at the time of [[ICANN]] 3 were as follows: [[Esther Dyson]] (Interim Chairman), Geraldine Capdeboscq, George Conrades, [[Greg Crew]], Frank Fitzsimmons,Hans Kraaijenbrink, [[Jun Murai]], [[Mike Roberts|Michael Roberts]],Eugenio Triana, and Linda S. Wilson.
−
 
  
 
* [[Mike Roberts]] was the SEO of ICANN at the time of [[ICANN]] 3
 
* [[Mike Roberts]] was the SEO of ICANN at the time of [[ICANN]] 3

Revision as of 20:14, 1 September 2021

ICANNLogo.png
Dates: August 23-26, 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Website: ICANN 3
Historical Significance
UDPR adopted,

ICANN 3 was held in Santiago, Chile, in August 1999. The meeting followed the same structure as previous meetings, and many of the sessions were broadcast over the Internet. All meetings were held at the College of Economic Sciences of the University of Chile [1].

UDRP

The board took further steps in the creation of the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy, approving the implementation of such a policy and offering the following guidance:

  1. The registrars' Model Dispute Resolution Policy should be used as a starting point;
  2. The President or his delegate should convene a small drafting committee including persons selected by him to express views and consider the interests of the registrar, non-commercial, individual, intellectual property, and business interests;
  3. In addition to the factors mentioned in paragraph 171(2) of the WIPO report, the following should be considered in determining whether a domain name was registered in bad faith:

a) Whether the domain name holder is making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the mark, without intent to misleadingly divert consumers for commercial gain or to tarnish the mark;
(b) Whether the domain name holder (including individuals, businesses, and other organizations) is commonly known by the domain name, even if the holder has acquired no trademark or service mark rights; and
(c) Whether, in seeking payment for transfer of the domain name, the domain name holder has limited its request for payment to its out-of-pocket costs.

  1. There should be a general parity between the appeal rights of complainants and domain name holders; and
  2. The dispute policy should seek to define and minimize reverse domain name hijacking.

Historical Notes


References

  1. ↑ [1]

ICANN 3 Website

The Minutes for all meetings

Location Information for ICANN 3

External Links

Santiago Meeting Website

The Agenda and the Minutes for all meetings

Location Information for ICANN 3

Retrieved from "https://icannwiki.org/index.php?title=ICANN_03&oldid=1335605"