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

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

On 6/23/15 8:36 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> I'm not sure I understood Dave's plan, but what I would suggest (which
> doesn't involve any bargaining chips as far as I can see) is:
>
> 1. State that the IETF Trust is the most appropriate vehicle to hold
> the IANA IPR as an asset for the entire Internet community. I think
> that would be a useful addendum to the IANAPLAN document, but it
> shouldn't be allowed to hold up the RFC publication.

That document is in the RFC Editor queue but is being held for the final
combined document (that has been the plan all along) so that we can
either reference or append it to make clear what the final outcome was,
for the record.  We do not normally amend other text beyond the
agreement, but this is entirely up to the area director.  I do wonder if
it would be useful to include as appendices consensus positions such as
that reached on February 19th in response to the ICG query.

If rough consensus has evolved to a different point, that would be
useful to clarify.  But again, I would suggest that the point here is
not to tell the Trust that we require that the domain and the trademark
and IPR be held, but rather that we simply state that it is our desire
to retain rights to use of them, should the IFO change, and how that
happens is a matter of discussion between lawyers and those who are
negotiating on our behalf, and not engineers.

Eliot