Re: [Ianaplan] [CWG-Stewardship] ICG request concerning IANA trademark and iana.org domain name

"Marc Blanchet" <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca> Sat, 20 June 2015 21:40 UTC

Return-Path: <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>
X-Original-To: ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0641A1AC3D9 for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 Jun 2015 14:40:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.911
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vpC9zvuMmyyz for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 Jun 2015 14:40:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E0EF1AC3D8 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Sat, 20 Jun 2015 14:40:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [206.123.31.194] (h194.viagenie.ca [206.123.31.194]) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0427F40376; Sat, 20 Jun 2015 17:40:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>
To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2015 18:40:11 -0300
Message-ID: <53D8D2B9-B636-470D-A634-F710F30CC8F2@viagenie.ca>
In-Reply-To: <5585D2E3.9070801@dcrocker.net>
References: <20150619170708.84611.qmail@ary.lan> <3F18936E1587B5F2BB89E800@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <55847BE9.9040507@gmail.com> <5584BC64.7060403@gmail.com> <alpine.OSX.2.11.1506192151170.47260@ary.local> <55855F68.4090906@gih.com> <CB2E8A54-4A4D-4DDF-BE62-B15BFC52C42D@istaff.org> <4F576AF8-A9D3-44BC-83EE-0CD86D5BF07D@gmail.com> <747E3649-D7C5-4AA2-9468-FF092961FEFD@istaff.org> <5585D2E3.9070801@dcrocker.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.1r5084)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/DciDj5EC5LSgD6GNbgPOzaAEbWI>
Cc: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, "ianaplan@ietf.org" <ianaplan@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] [CWG-Stewardship] ICG request concerning IANA trademark and iana.org domain name
X-BeenThere: ianaplan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IANA Plan <ianaplan.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ianaplan>, <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/>
List-Post: <mailto:ianaplan@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan>, <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2015 21:40:27 -0000


On 20 Jun 2015, at 17:53, Dave Crocker wrote:

> On 6/20/2015 1:46 PM, John Curran wrote:
>> On Jun 20, 2015, at 3:43 PM, Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> There is one peculiar aspect of this, which is that currently the
>>> IETF has no license to use the IANA trademark, yet it does appear
>>> to use it with regularity.  If the IETF's field of use is covered
>>> by the registration then there is an issue *today*, yet this topic
>
> +1
>
>
>> Bernard -
>>
>> There’s quite a few peculiar aspects to all of this…  (e.g. the 
>> USG
>> having a contract with ICANN to provide IANA protocol parameter
>> registry services when the IETF has an MOU with ICANN for the same
>> services;  the use of IANA mark in a very large context by IETF for
>> years  before ICANN ever existed and yet the trademark now held by
>> ICANN, etc.)
>
> +1
>
>
> ...
>> The exercise we now face is that the overall USG imprimatur (e.g. the
>> IANA Functions contract) may be removed in the near future, and hence
>> we need to make sure that we have arrangements that make sense going
>> forward _in the absence of the USG saying ‘just make it all work’ 
>> via
>> the IANA functions contract_
>
> +10
>
> Names matter, especially when they have long-established use.  A
> trademark is a formalized aspect of naming.
>
> The assumption that we can and should ignore matters of using the IANA
> name and mark, when it is held by an organization that is a service
> provider, rather than the originator or actual owner of the service,

so you are in some ways saying that the 3 organisations should 
« co-own » the trademark and provide a license to ICANN/PTI for its 
use?  Looks like more towards the IETF trust owning the trademark, as it 
was discussed before.

Marc.


> seems an especially lax exercise in our responsibilities.


>
> There is a real issue here.  It's easy to pretend we don't.  That 
> would
> be a mistake.
>
> d/
>
>
> -- 
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> bbiw.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ianaplan mailing list
> Ianaplan@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan