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

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

On 6/20/2015 1:46 PM, John Curran wrote:
> 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

+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,
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