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

[John Curran <[e-mail]>]

On Jun 20, 2015, at 3:43 PM, Bernard Aboba <[e-mail]> 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 does not appear to be covered in the MOU nor in the NTIA-ICANN contract, as far as I can see.

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.)

   Without getting into an overly laborious exercise, it’s probably good to remember that 
   ICANN was envisioned as a formalized incorporated version of the IANA, and was to 
   do just what Jon (et al) did, only with a more formal structure around it.  The ICANN
   blueprint did not have the vast DNS representation structure and policy development 
   activities; the original bylaws called for the DNSO to be distinct from ICANN, just as
   the ASO and Protocol Support Organization (PSO).   In this context, some of the 
   more interesting aspects of the present arrangements might make more sense.

   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_

   This is bound to expose some issues that need to be considered, since the lightweight
   coordination of IETF activities with other communities (i.e. the PSO) has since been 
   struck, the DNS community effectively was injected into ICANN itself (changing it from a 
   formalization of just the IANA into a heavily DNS focused organization.)  None of these
   departures from the original blueprint matter much while we have an all-emcompassing
   NTIA IANA functions contract, but in the absence of such, it’s going to be fairly important
   to get the relationships “right” going forward.

/John

Disclaimers:  My views alone.  
                      Apologies for length, in a airport and lack time for appropriate editing...