[NRO-IANAXFER] Internet Number Community IANA Stewardship Proposal:First Draft

Seun Ojedeji seun.ojedeji at gmail.com
Sat Dec 20 17:11:32 CET 2014

Hi Richard,

Do find inset...thanks

On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 3:57 PM, Richard Hill <rhill at hill-a.ch> wrote:

> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com]
> >Sent: samedi, 20. décembre 2014 15:22
> >To: Richard Hill
> >Cc: Mwendwa Kivuva; ianaxfer at nro.net
> >Subject: Re: [NRO-IANAXFER] Internet Number Community IANA Stewardship
> Proposal:First Draft
> >
> >Perhaps you care to give a scenario on how intellectual property rights
> can come
> > to the rescue
> It's not a question of "coming to the rescue".  It is question of ensuring
> that the relevant items can continue to be used appropriately even if the
> IANA function is, at some time in the future, no longer performed by ICANN,
> but by some other organization.

Relevant Items like the name IANA and iana.org right...yeah i get what you
mean. However i would expect that if the functions does get moved to
another organisation it logically includes those items because it is with
those items that the agreement were signed in the first place and the
operator would not lay claims on them.
On the other hand in a worse/unlikely scenario when ICANN does, then it
would be that ICANN will have those items but will not be able to perform
any functions with it...I think it would then be important to determine
whether performing the IANA functions as (new name) EXAMPLE in location
example.org would be a big deal (personally don't think so)

> >>I am not a lawyer so there may be something i am missing....because i
> can't
> > seem to connect the dot
> Does the above help?

Yes it does

> >>The second is the use of the IANA trademark and the IANA.ORG domain
> name.
> >
> >I think using a scenario may help me here; perhaps a wild one could be
> that
> > IANA operator (ICANN) decide that iana.org is her property.
> This is not a wild scenario, it is the current reality.  ICANN owns the
> registered trademark IANA, and it owns the domain name IANA.ORG.

By my statement above i meant the property sense of ownership (one may
argue there is a difference between renting and purchasing a property); I
think i will put this in context that ICANN is currently empowered at the
moment to do that as the IANA operator and that is what the current draft
is also reflecting.

> >
> Another option is that the new contract between the RIRs and ICANN
> specifies that the RIRs could continue to use the mark IANA and the domain
> name IANA.ORG if their part of the IANA function is transferred to some
> entity other than ICANN.

Actually in a scenario where its a community that pulls out, i think it may
be neater to not even use the name IANA and iana.org any longer.

> >Generally i don't think adding that phrase in the agreement
> I'm not suggesting to add that phrase in the final contract between the
> RIRs and ICANN.  The phrase in question outlines items for which detailed
> language should be developed for the final contract.
> I think thats fine for the ICG to consider, but  they should be mindful of
how this is worded so as not to indirectly restrict a community from using
another name/url when its become absolutely necessary.

> > strengthens or protect anything, as infact it may bring different meaning
> > to how the IP resource is viewed...plus we may need to have to define
> > what international property rights mean.
> Intellectual property, not international property.

My bad...typo....but yes intellectual property is what i meant

> I think that the term "intellectual property" is well enough understood.

Maybe not as it can be complicated in a multi-community scenario as this.
The wikipedia[1] definition of IP says

*Intellectual property* (IP) is a legal term that refers to creations of
> the mind.....Under intellectual property laws owners of intellectual
> property are granted certain exclusive rights

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property

> >The other complication is that IANA trademark is not used by RIRs alone
> neither
> > is iana.org so i don't know how the RIRs will claim trademark
> autonomy/authority.
> I didn't suggest that the RIRs would claim trademark autonmy/authority.
> All I have suggested to date is that the final contract should address the
> intellectual property issues, for example by including a clause to the
> effect that ICANN would agree to allow use, for free, of the IANA mark and
> the IANA.ORG domain name, by any future entity which was contracted, by
> the RIRs, to perform the IANA function.
> > The RIRs IMO (in this context) would/should be concerned about ability to
> > effectively manage IP resource globally and that alone
> Indeed.  But isn't the publication of the information on the IANA web site
> part of that ability?


*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:      http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
<http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email:
<http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
<seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*

The key to understanding is humility - my view !
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/attachments/20141220/cd182301/attachment.html>

More information about the ianaxfer mailing list