[NRO-IANAXFER] IANA IPR considerations
Hans Petter Holen
hph at oslo.net
Tue Dec 23 16:33:40 CET 2014
I agree that this makes sense.
For the RIRs it would be relatively easy to "rename" the global numbers
registry held by IANA as the number of global policies refering to IANA
is limited, while it will be impossible for the IETF to update all
refernces in the RFCs.
So keeping the domainname and other rights connected with IANA with the
IETF (trust) is the best option I have seen.
On 23/12/14 15:48, Richard Hill wrote:
> Indeed, it seems to me that it would be logical, and consistent with
> the history of the use of the IANA name, to transfer both the IANA
> trademark and the IANA.ORG domain name to the IETF Trust, as outlined
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* ianaxfer-bounces at nro.net
> [mailto:ianaxfer-bounces at nro.net]*On Behalf Of *Avri Doria
> *Sent:* mardi, 23. décembre 2014 15:41
> *To:* ianaxfer at nro.net
> *Subject:* Re: [NRO-IANAXFER] IANA IPR considerations
> One of the suggestion made by the ICANN Non Commercial Stakeholder
> Group (NCSG) in its CWG-Stewardship comments is that:
>> As a precaution we suggest that discussions be held with the IETF
>> Trust, regarding
>> the domain name iana.org and suggesting that it hold the name for
>> use by the names,
>> numbers and protocols directories. Any changes to the use of the
>> domain name
>> should be agreed to by all operational communities.
> On 23-Dec-14 06:13, Richard Hill wrote:
>> Please see below.
>> Thanks and best,
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From:ianaxfer-bounces at nro.net [mailto:ianaxfer-bounces at nro.net]On
>>> Behalf Of Alan Barrett
>>> Sent: mardi, 23. decembre 2014 11:44
>>> To:ianaxfer at nro.net
>>> Subject: Re: [NRO-IANAXFER] IANA IPR considerations
>>> On Tue, 23 Dec 2014, Richard Hill wrote:
>>>> I support this approach and suggested way forward.
>>>> (But I don't think that it can be said the ICANN should have no claim
>>>> on the associated IPR - they own the IANA mark. Rather, I think it can
>>>> be said that ICANN will allow appropriate use of the associated IPR.)
>>> The IANA mark was in use long before ICANN existed.
>> Yes, but it was not registered. ICANN registered the mark.
>>> In my opinion,
>>> ICANN has no rights to the mark other than by virtue of their role as
>>> operator of the IANA services,
>> No, ICANN owns the registered mark.
>>> and if ICANN were to cease being the
>>> operator of the IANA services, then they should cease to have any rights
>>> to use of the IANA mark. In my personal opinion, this principle should
>>> be codified.
>> What happens if only part of the IANA functions cease to be provided by
>> ICANN? Surely ICANN should be allowed to continue to use the IANA mark for
>> those functions that it does provide?
>> There are various ways of dealing with the situation. For example, the new
>> contract for the IANA function can specify that ICANN will allow a successor
>> to use its mark. Or that ICANN will agree to transfer the mark if there is
>> a transfer of the IANA function.
>> Alternatively, the mark could be transferred as part of the current process,
>> for example to a new entity, if some new entity is created. Or to a
>> consortium of existing entities, which might include the RIRs.
>> As you (Alan) correctly said at the beginning, the codification of the
>> principle can be worked out by the legal team.
>>> --apb (Alan Barrett)
>>> ianaxfer mailing list
>>> ianaxfer at nro.net
>> ianaxfer mailing list
>> ianaxfer at nro.net
> ianaxfer mailing list
> ianaxfer at nro.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ianaxfer