roberts-testimony-28july99.htm

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>ICANN - Roberts Testimony - July 28, 1999</TITLE>
<META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR>
<META content="C:\PROGRAM FILES\MSOFFICE\OFFICE\html.dot" name=Template></HEAD>
<BODY link=#0000ff vLink=#800080 bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<P align=center><a href="index.html"><IMG height=145 src="icann-logo.gif" width=188 border="0"></a></P>
<B><FONT size=5>
<P align=center>&nbsp;</P>
<P align=center>Prepared Testimony<br>
  of<br>
  Michael M. Roberts</P>
</font></B>
<P align=center>Interim President and Chief Executive Officer<br>
  Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers</P>
<P align=center>July 28, 1999</P>
<P>U.S. House of Representatives<br>
  Committee on the Judiciary<br>
  Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property</P>
<P>&nbsp;</P>
<P>Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:</P>
<P>I welcome the opportunity to appear here today to discuss the activities of
  the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) regarding the
  relationship between Internet domain names and intellectual property rights.</P>
<P>ICANN is the non-profit, private sector corporation formed by a broad coalition
  of the Internet’s business, technical, and academic communities in October 1998
  in response to the invitation of the U.S. Government in its <a href="general/white-paper-05jun98.htm">Statement
  of Policy on Management of Internet Names and Addresses</a>, 63 Fed. Reg. 31741
  (June 10, 1998), usually known as the "White Paper." ICANN has been designated
  by the Government to serve as the global consensus entity to which it is transferring
  responsibility for coordinating the assignment of Internet protocol parameters,
  the management of the domain-name system, the allocation of the IP address space,
  and the management of the Internet root server system.</P>
<P>Recognizing the large number of witnesses appearing today, I will devote my
  presentation to a concise report on the status of ICANN’s consideration and
  treatment of intellectual property rights in connection with the domain-name
  system. As noted above, the White Paper contemplated that ICANN would assume
  responsibility for four Internet coordination functions. One of those functions
  involves overseeing operation of the domain-name system.</P>
<P>As the <a href="http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/6_5_98dns.htm">White
  Paper</a> recognized, the increasing commercial use of the Internet has given
  rise to increasing conflicts between the domain-name system and intellectual
  property. To help resolve this "trademark dilemma," the White Paper envisioned
  that "the <a href="http://www.wipo.int/eng/main.htm">World Intellectual Property
  Organization (WIPO)</a> would initiate a balanced and transparent process, which
  includes trademark holders and members of the Internet community who are not
  trademark holders," to recommend procedures for minimizing problems between
  the trademark and domain-name systems. 63 Fed. Reg. at 31747. Accordingly, in
  the <a href="http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/6_5_98dns.htm">White
  Paper</a> the U.S. Government stated its intent to "[a]sk WIPO to convene an
  international process including individuals from the private sector and government
  to develop a set of recommendations for trademark/domain name dispute resolutions
  and other issues to be presented to the Interim [ICANN] Board for its consideration
  as soon as possible&nbsp;. . . ." 63 Fed. Reg. at 31751.</P>
<P>Following this request, in late 1998 and early 1999 WIPO conducted an extensive
  process to gather comments from interested parties and, on April 30, 1999, WIPO
  submitted its <a href="http://wipo2.wipo.int/process/eng/final_report.html">Final
  Report</a> to the ICANN Board containing recommendations in the following areas:</P>
<ul type="circle">
  <LI>Domain-name registration practices to reduce conflicts with intellectual
    property rights. (<a href="http://wipo2.wipo.int/process/eng/final/FinalReport_2.html#CH2">Chapter
    2 of Final WIPO Report</a>.) Although the Final Report included a large number
    of recommended registration practices, the most noteworthy relate to ensuring
    that accurate contact information is available about domain names and to providing
    that registrars receive prepayment before name registrations go active.
  <LI>A procedure for administrative resolution of disputes over domain-name registrations.
    As reflected in <a href="http://wipo2.wipo.int/process/eng/final/FinalReport_3.html#CH3">Chapter
    3</a> of its Final Report, WIPO recommended that an administrative dispute-resolution
    procedure be required only in cases arising from "abusive" domain-name registrations.
  <LI>In <a href="http://wipo2.wipo.int/process/eng/final/FinalReport_4.html#CH4">Chapters
    4 and 5</a>, the Final WIPO Report recommended that famous and well-known
    marks be excluded from registration as domain names (other than by their owners)
    and that new global top-level domains be introduced only at a controlled rate
    after famous-mark exclusions are in effect.</LI>
</ul>
<P>ICANN began consideration of the WIPO Final Report at its quarterly meeting
  on May 26-27, 1999. At that meeting, the ICANN Board responded to the WIPO Report
  in the following manner:</P>
<ul type="circle">
  <LI>Nearly all of the WIPO recommendations on registration practices had already
    been included in the ICANN registrar accreditation policy, which the Board
    adopted in March 1999 in preparation for the April 26, 1999, onset of competition
    in the business of registering names in the .com, .net, and .org domains.
    In particular, the ICANN registrar accreditation policy requires that accurate
    contact information be made publicly available on a real-time basis and that
    registrations not be activated until the registrar receives a reasonable assurance
    of payment, such as through use of a credit card.
  <LI>With respect to dispute-resolution procedures, the ICANN Board endorsed
    the WIPO-recommended principle that there should be a uniform dispute policy
    for all registrars in the .com, .net, and .org domains. At its May meeting,
    the ICANN Board also took action to institute the ICANN <a href="http://www.dnso.org">Domain
    Name Supporting Organization (DNSO)</a>, which is responsible for evaluating
    policies concerning domain names. The details of the appropriate uniform dispute-resolution
    were referred to the DNSO, which was requested to propose a specific policy
    in time for adoption by the Board at the next quarterly ICANN meeting, in
    August 1999.
  <LI>To avoid unnecessary conflicts pending adoption of a formal policy, the
    ICANN Board passed a resolution calling on the testbed registrars, who are
    in the process of entering the domain-name registrar business, to work together
    to formulate a model dispute resolution policy for voluntary adoption.
  <LI>The topics of famous-names exclusions and establishment of new top-level
    domains appeared to engender more controversy in the Internet community. Accordingly,
    the ICANN Board asked the DNSO to evaluate these aspects of the WIPO report
    and develop recommendations on these topics once the DNSO completes work on
    the dispute-resolution policy.</LI>
</ul>
<P>Since the quarterly ICANN meeting in May, the DNSO has been working diligently
  on the dispute-resolution issues. A working group has issued a report, which
  is being considered by the DNSO Names Council. Two of the other witnesses at
  this hearing are members of the Names Council, and can provide you details on
  those proceedings. The ICANN Board looks forward to receiving the DNSO report
  on dispute resolution in the near future, so that it may be considered at the
  ICANN Board meeting at the end of August.</P>
<P>I thank the Committee for the opportunity to present this report, and look
  forward to answering any questions you might have.</P>
<P>&nbsp;</P>
<hr width="80%" noshade>
<P>&nbsp;</P>
</BODY></HTML>
	<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
	<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>ICANN - Roberts Testimony - July 28, 1999</TITLE>
	<META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type>
	<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR>
	<META content="C:\PROGRAM FILES\MSOFFICE\OFFICE\html.dot" name=Template></HEAD>
	<BODY link=#0000ff vLink=#800080 bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
	<P align=center><a href="index.html"><IMG height=145 src="icann-logo.gif" width=188 border="0"></a></P>
	<B><FONT size=5>
	<P align=center> </P>
	<P align=center>Prepared Testimony<br>
	of<br>
	Michael M. Roberts</P>
	</font></B>
	<P align=center>Interim President and Chief Executive Officer<br>
	Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers</P>
	<P align=center>July 28, 1999</P>
	<P>U.S. House of Representatives<br>
	Committee on the Judiciary<br>
	Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property</P>
	<P> </P>
	<P>Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:</P>
	<P>I welcome the opportunity to appear here today to discuss the activities of
	the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) regarding the
	relationship between Internet domain names and intellectual property rights.</P>
	<P>ICANN is the non-profit, private sector corporation formed by a broad coalition
	of the Internet’s business, technical, and academic communities in October 1998
	in response to the invitation of the U.S. Government in its <a href="general/white-paper-05jun98.htm">Statement
	of Policy on Management of Internet Names and Addresses</a>, 63 Fed. Reg. 31741
	(June 10, 1998), usually known as the "White Paper." ICANN has been designated
	by the Government to serve as the global consensus entity to which it is transferring
	responsibility for coordinating the assignment of Internet protocol parameters,
	the management of the domain-name system, the allocation of the IP address space,
	and the management of the Internet root server system.</P>
	<P>Recognizing the large number of witnesses appearing today, I will devote my
	presentation to a concise report on the status of ICANN’s consideration and
	treatment of intellectual property rights in connection with the domain-name
	system. As noted above, the White Paper contemplated that ICANN would assume
	responsibility for four Internet coordination functions. One of those functions
	involves overseeing operation of the domain-name system.</P>
	<P>As the <a href="http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/6_5_98dns.htm">White
	Paper</a> recognized, the increasing commercial use of the Internet has given
	rise to increasing conflicts between the domain-name system and intellectual
	property. To help resolve this "trademark dilemma," the White Paper envisioned
	that "the <a href="http://www.wipo.int/eng/main.htm">World Intellectual Property
	Organization (WIPO)</a> would initiate a balanced and transparent process, which
	includes trademark holders and members of the Internet community who are not
	trademark holders," to recommend procedures for minimizing problems between
	the trademark and domain-name systems. 63 Fed. Reg. at 31747. Accordingly, in
	the <a href="http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/6_5_98dns.htm">White
	Paper</a> the U.S. Government stated its intent to "[a]sk WIPO to convene an
	international process including individuals from the private sector and government
	to develop a set of recommendations for trademark/domain name dispute resolutions
	and other issues to be presented to the Interim [ICANN] Board for its consideration
	as soon as possible . . . ." 63 Fed. Reg. at 31751.</P>
	<P>Following this request, in late 1998 and early 1999 WIPO conducted an extensive
	process to gather comments from interested parties and, on April 30, 1999, WIPO
	submitted its <a href="http://wipo2.wipo.int/process/eng/final_report.html">Final
	Report</a> to the ICANN Board containing recommendations in the following areas:</P>
	<ul type="circle">
	<LI>Domain-name registration practices to reduce conflicts with intellectual
	property rights. (<a href="http://wipo2.wipo.int/process/eng/final/FinalReport_2.html#CH2">Chapter
	2 of Final WIPO Report</a>.) Although the Final Report included a large number
	of recommended registration practices, the most noteworthy relate to ensuring
	that accurate contact information is available about domain names and to providing
	that registrars receive prepayment before name registrations go active.
	<LI>A procedure for administrative resolution of disputes over domain-name registrations.
	As reflected in <a href="http://wipo2.wipo.int/process/eng/final/FinalReport_3.html#CH3">Chapter
	3</a> of its Final Report, WIPO recommended that an administrative dispute-resolution
	procedure be required only in cases arising from "abusive" domain-name registrations.
	<LI>In <a href="http://wipo2.wipo.int/process/eng/final/FinalReport_4.html#CH4">Chapters
	4 and 5</a>, the Final WIPO Report recommended that famous and well-known
	marks be excluded from registration as domain names (other than by their owners)
	and that new global top-level domains be introduced only at a controlled rate
	after famous-mark exclusions are in effect.</LI>
	</ul>
	<P>ICANN began consideration of the WIPO Final Report at its quarterly meeting
	on May 26-27, 1999. At that meeting, the ICANN Board responded to the WIPO Report
	in the following manner:</P>
	<ul type="circle">
	<LI>Nearly all of the WIPO recommendations on registration practices had already
	been included in the ICANN registrar accreditation policy, which the Board
	adopted in March 1999 in preparation for the April 26, 1999, onset of competition
	in the business of registering names in the .com, .net, and .org domains.
	In particular, the ICANN registrar accreditation policy requires that accurate
	contact information be made publicly available on a real-time basis and that
	registrations not be activated until the registrar receives a reasonable assurance
	of payment, such as through use of a credit card.
	<LI>With respect to dispute-resolution procedures, the ICANN Board endorsed
	the WIPO-recommended principle that there should be a uniform dispute policy
	for all registrars in the .com, .net, and .org domains. At its May meeting,
	the ICANN Board also took action to institute the ICANN <a href="http://www.dnso.org">Domain
	Name Supporting Organization (DNSO)</a>, which is responsible for evaluating
	policies concerning domain names. The details of the appropriate uniform dispute-resolution
	were referred to the DNSO, which was requested to propose a specific policy
	in time for adoption by the Board at the next quarterly ICANN meeting, in
	August 1999.
	<LI>To avoid unnecessary conflicts pending adoption of a formal policy, the
	ICANN Board passed a resolution calling on the testbed registrars, who are
	in the process of entering the domain-name registrar business, to work together
	to formulate a model dispute resolution policy for voluntary adoption.
	<LI>The topics of famous-names exclusions and establishment of new top-level
	domains appeared to engender more controversy in the Internet community. Accordingly,
	the ICANN Board asked the DNSO to evaluate these aspects of the WIPO report
	and develop recommendations on these topics once the DNSO completes work on
	the dispute-resolution policy.</LI>
	</ul>
	<P>Since the quarterly ICANN meeting in May, the DNSO has been working diligently
	on the dispute-resolution issues. A working group has issued a report, which
	is being considered by the DNSO Names Council. Two of the other witnesses at
	this hearing are members of the Names Council, and can provide you details on
	those proceedings. The ICANN Board looks forward to receiving the DNSO report
	on dispute resolution in the near future, so that it may be considered at the
	ICANN Board meeting at the end of August.</P>
	<P>I thank the Committee for the opportunity to present this report, and look
	forward to answering any questions you might have.</P>
	<P> </P>
	<hr width="80%" noshade>
	<P> </P>
	</BODY></HTML>