SUBSCRIBE TODAY!
Subscribing entitles a reader to complete stories on all topics released as they happen, special features, confidential documents and access to the complete, searchable story archive online back to 2004.
IP-Watch Interns Summer 2013

IP-Watch interns Brittany Ngo (Yale Graduate School of Public Health) and Caitlin McGivern (University of Law, London) talk about their Geneva experience in summer 2013. 2:42.

Inside Views

Submit ideas to info [at] ip-watch [dot] ch!

We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

Quantitative Analysis Of Contributions To NETMundial Meeting

A quantitative analysis of the 187 submissions to the April NETmundial conference on the future of internet governance shows broad support for improving security, ensuring respect for privacy, ensuring freedom of expression, and globalizing the IANA function, analyst Richard Hill writes.


Latest Comments
  • Why should anyone care what James Anaya thinks? In... »
  • If this goes ahead, as the EU will "speak" for all... »

  • For IPW Subscribers

    A directory of IP delegates in Geneva. Read more>

    A guide to Geneva-based public health and intellectual property organisations. Read More >


    Monthly Reporter

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter, published from 2004 to January 2011, is a 16-page monthly selection of the most important, updated stories and features, plus the People and News Briefs columns.

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter is available in an online archive on the IP-Watch website, available for IP-Watch Subscribers.

    Access the Monthly Reporter Archive >

    1,930 Applications For New Domains: .App More Desirable Than .Sex

    Published on 14 June 2012 @ 12:35 am

    By for Intellectual Property Watch

    It is not .sex (or .sexy) anymore, it is .app that companies investing in new domains on the internet think most desirable: 13 applications to operate a future .app registry have been filed with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), which revealed a complete list of 1,930 new top level domain (TLD) applications at a press conference in London on 13 June.

    The biggest chunk of the applications (911) came from the United States, 675 from Europe, 303 from the Asia Pacific and 24 from Latin America. Some large Web corporations like Amazon and Google asked for considerable shares in addition to the well-established TLD registries like Afilias and VeriSign. Only 17 names were applied for by African organisations.

    For the past seven years, ICANN has prepared the process to extend the domain name space and allow the addition of new name zones in addition to .com, .net and the roughly 260 country code TLDs (ccTLDs, such as .uk for United Kingdom) and bring some more choice. ICANN CEO Rod Beckstrom said today (13 June) in London that ICANN now was delivering.

    The ICANN press release is here.

    Application strings are available here and here.

    “It is a historic day,” he said. The lack of innovation in the name space, domain name investor Frank Schilling, founder of a new registry-venture Unitymedia, wrote recently, had long driven people into the hands of social media platforms. Many trademark owners on the other hand are still complaining and warning about the potential negative consequences from the new name richness.

    With the 1,930 applications revealed today – including 84 applications for communities and 66 designated for geographic locations from Rome to Sydney and 117 non-Latin-based script TLDs – discussions are far over.

    One issue of contention is the names that have been applied for by several applicants. For instance, .app has been applied for by Google, Amazon, and Afilias plus 10 other companies from various parts of the world.

    ICANN Senior Vice President Kurt Pritz said ICANN would allow for talks between the applicants for the same domain. Community TLDs would be privileged, he said when asked how ICANN would decide who should run names of high public value, like .web.

    Altogether, 231 of the names have been applied for by 751 companies or organisations, with TLDs like .music, .movie, .web, .shop or .news being hotly contested.

    As expected by many experts there were close to no attempts to “cybersquat” big brand names on the top level. Companies like .apple or .sap but also car manufacturers like Chrysler or BMW applied for their own names, as did several pharmaceutical companies (Sanofi, Merck and Abbott) and some associations.

    The National Association of Boards of Pharmacy (NABP), a trade association of pharmacy boards, wants to establish .pharmacy to address the problem of online counterfeit drug sales.

    The domain .hiv was applied for with the hope of establishing a virtual red ribbon to spend more money on projects to help people with HIV/AIDS. The German Post applied for as many as four TLDs, including .trust and observers may be interested to see what the plans are for that. Interestingly, several classical media outlets like the Guardian, the Spiegel, Xinhua News Agency or Canal + have also applied for their own zones.

    All strings will now undergo a four-month evaluation by external evaluators who will check financial, technical and organisational conditions.

    At the same time there are several channels for filing objections, government “early warnings” and a 60-day public comment period.

    “The first names could be in the root in the first quarter of 2013,” ICANN’s Pritz. Yet all those which fail the evaluation, are contested or are objected to will take much more time.

    One more issue for complaints is the batching of the applications: only 500 selected according to an unusual digital archery system can be run through the process first. The rest have to wait for some months and “most want to be in the first batch,” Pritz said.

    Names that led to some raised eyebrows right away were TLDs like .sucks or generic names in non-Latin scripts, like transliterations of .com in Arabic, Chinese or Japanese obviously in an effort to protect .com.

    How Chinese and Arabic governments will react to the application of the Pontifical Council for Social Communication for “.catholic” in their scripts also remains to be seen. The objections will also be a test for the ICANN Government Advisory Committee (GAC) as there may be debates between western and non-western countries about names like .gay.

    In addition, the upcoming ICANN meeting in Prague, Czech Republic, will see all the existing registry companies – .com-registry VeriSign, Afilias or Core – talking to their new competitors. This might involve the ambitious request for over 300 TLDs by registry Donuts, or Uniregistry, which partnered with well-known DNS-technology provider ISC, the British Cayman Island-based Top Level Domain Holdings, which is in for a lot of contested TLDs, or the IT and Web heavyweights like Google, Amazon and Microsoft.

    With the opening up of the namespace a lot more lies ahead of ICANN, plus it is sitting on a pile of $350 million US dollars. The money had been collected to retrieve the costs for the complicated process, Beckstrom assured reporters. Money which would not be needed to fund the evaluation and application process will not go to ICANN operations, Beckstrom said, and the community would get to decide on what it would be spent.

    Monika Ermert may be reached at info@ip-watch.ch.

     


    Leave a Reply

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website. By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

    By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

    2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

    3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

    4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

    5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

    6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

    7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

    8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

    9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

     

     
    Your IP address is 50.16.65.168