[Random-bits] Steve Metalitz's meeting with ICANN Executives

[James Love]

Steve Metalitz is a lobbyist for intellectual property owners.  This
is a report that he wrote about his January 27, 2000 meeting with ICANN
executives.  I believe he wrote this for the "Intellectual Property
Constituency," or IPC, that representss "Trademark, Intellectual
Property and Anti-Counterfeiting Interests" and ICANN.  (I can't keep up
with all this, but there is some background on the IPC here:
http://www.icann.org/minutes/exhibita.htm#4)

Interestingly, Metalitz write:

     ICANN is initiating a 'comprehensive compliance review program' to
     make sure that accredited registrars . . . are fulfilling th
     obligations they assumed in their accreditation agreements.  The
     goal is to mak  such compliance policing a "core competence" of 
     ICANN.  . . .  I intervened in strong support of the need for ICANN 
     to ensure that accredited registrars are in compliance with their
     obligations, particularly regarding WHOIS.

The WHOIS issuse is the first step in IP owners using ICANN to impose
polices that make it easier to identify alleged violations of
intellectual property.  Here is his report, which mostly deals with
ICANN voting issues.   Jamie


>From: Steve Metalitz <metalitz@iipa.com>
>To: Mike Kirk <mkirk@aipla.org>, Rodrigo Albagli <zal@entelchile.net>,
>         Marylee Jenkins <mljenkins@rbd-law.com>,
>         Hayden Gregory
>	 <gregoryh@staff.abanet.org>,
>         Lee Schroeder <lschroeder@aipla.org>,
>         Jonathan Hudis <jhudis@oblon.com>, Joan McGivern 
><jmcgivern@ascap.com>,
>         Sam Mosenkis <smosenkis@ascap.com>,
>         Andrew Collins
>	 <acollins@ajpark.co.nz>,
>         "Alberto Berton Moreno, Jr." <law@sbm.com.ar>,
>         Felipe Claro <felipe@claro.cl>, jms@olivares.com.mx,
>         Nisha Tyree
>	 <ntyree@publishers.org>, nicholas.wood@netsearchers.net,
>         Ian Jay Kaufman
>	 <ikaufman@ladasparry.com>,
>         Stuart Rosen <srosen@bmi.com>, Mike Remington
>	 <remingmj@dbr.com>,
>         Bob Kruger <bobk@bsa.org>, Don Medley <donm@bsa.org>,
>         Antonio Mille <antonio@mille.com.ar>, M C Ralph <mail@cipa.org.uk>,
>         Wenquan Yang <mail@cpahkltd.com>,
>         Cristina Guerra
>	 <cristina@guerralaw.com.br>,
>         eric.fingerhut@shawpittman.com, Steven Wadyka <wadykas@gtlaw.com>,
>         Mikki Barry <ooblick@netpolicy.com>,
>         Dan Steinberg <dstein@travel-net.com>,
>         Morris John
>	 <mail@drew-and-napier.com.sg>,
>         Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@aim.be>,
>         David Tatham <tatham@dial.pipex.com>, Roland Louski <enpa@enpa.be>,
>         Angela Mills <angelamills.epc@btinternet.com>,
>         Emma Ascroft
>	 <emma.ascroft@europe-analytica.com>,
>         Jonathan Cohen
>	 <jcohen@shapirocohen.com>,
>         Victoria Carrington
>	 <vcarrington@shapirocohen.com>,
>         John Orange <jorange@orpat.com>,
>         "Dipl.-Ing. Helmut Sonn" <sonn@sonn.at>,
>         Angela Babineck
>	 <angelab@idsa.com>,
>         Isabelle Roudard <IsabelleRoudard@pophost.eunet.be>,
>         "Dr. Nils Bortloff" <nils.bortloff@ifpi.org>,
>         Steve Metalitz
>	 <metalitz@iipa.com>,
>         Kevin Thompson <kthompson@dmmlaw.com>,
>         Michael Heltzer <mheltzer@inta.org>,
>         Susan Anthony
>	 <susan.anthony@wcom.com>,
>         Caroline Chicoine <cchicoine@bspmlaw.com>,
>         Michael Erdle <merdle@dww.com>, Luise Czernenko Reid <lcreid@ipic.ca>,
>         Lindsay Casey <post@frkelly.ie>, Tod Cohen <tcohen@mpaa.org>,
>         Ted Shapiro
>	 <tshapiro@mpaa.org>,
>         Elissa Hecker <ehecker@harryfox.com>,
>         Herbert Schwartz <hschwartz@fishneave.com>,
>         John Delehanty <jmd@ogk.com>, eprager@darbylaw.com,
>         Jose de Pierola <estudio@pierola.com.pe>,
>         Sarah Deutsch <sarah.b.deutsch@bellatlantic.com>,
>         Jonathan Whitehead
>	 <jwhitehead@riaa.com>,
>         Mike Flynn <mflynn@siia.net>, Dan Duncan
>	 <dduncan@siia.net>,
>         Keith Kupferschmid <kkupfer@siia.net>, admin@tmpdf.org.uk,
>         Julio Enrique Zaldivar <jzaldivar@ejje.com>,
>         June Besek <jbesek@law.columbia.edu>, lcristal@fishneave.com,
>         stafford_guest@yahoo.com, Howard Hill <howard@netnames.com>,
>         matthooker@hotmail.com, parksy@oomph.net,
>         Helene Ramonatxo
>	 <helene_ramonatxo@vuitton.com>, attyross@aol.com,
>         Martin Schwimmer
>	 <martys@interport.net>,
>         Russ Smith <Russ@russ-smith.com>, Jason Vogel
>	 <jasonvogel@ibm.net>,
>         Vincenzo Pedrazzini <v.pedrazzini@aippi.org>,
>         Guillermo Carey <gcarey@carey.cl>

>Subject: RE: Report on meeting with ICANN Executives 1/27/00
>Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2000 14:04:18 -0500
>
>
>TO:	IPC Participants
>FM:	Steve Metalitz, Executive Vice President
>RE:	Report on meeting with ICANN executives, 1/27/00
>
>DT:	1/29/00
>
>	Last Thursday, January 27, I attended an informal meeting in
>Washington with Mike Roberts, interim CEO of ICANN; Louis Touton, General
>Counsel of ICANN; and Andrew McLaughlin, CFO of ICANN.  This is a brief
>report to Mike Kirk, who was unable to attend, and to the other participants
>in the IPC.
>
>	The ICANN executives identified four main issues "on the docket" for
>the Cairo meetings in March:  (1) at-large ICANN membership and the
>elections for at-large members of the ICANN Board; (2) new gTLD's and the
>associated issue of protection for famous marks; (3) coordination with
>ccTLD's and regional Internet address registries; and (4) budget.  Most of
>the discussion focused on the first issue.
>
>As you may know, ICANN is currently proceeding to sign up individual
>members, who will choose an At-Large Council, which will select nine new
>Board members by September 30, 2000.  The membership sign-up process is
>currently in "alpha testing" and could go "live" as soon as February 11.
>ICANN has also received a grant from the Markle Foundation to enable several
>public interest groups to evaluate this process and make recommendations for
>improvements in it.  Representatives of several of the groups participating
>in the Markle-funded review also attended last Thursday's meeting.
>
>There is clearly a lot of unhappiness about the procedures now underway and
>about the tight deadline for electing new Board members (which derives from
>the agreement under which the U.S. government is devolving its Internet
>management functions to ICANN).  Among other things, it will be almost
>impossible for the Markle-funded review to have any impact on the process,
>given the deadlines involved.  There are also concerns about whether the
>at-large election process could easily be "captured" by a single company or
>country that would encourage its employees (or citizens) to sign up in
>massive numbers in order to influence the election.  Obviously, the
>seriousness of these questions also depends to a great extent on how broad
>or narrow ICANN's mandate is perceived to be.
>
>As a result of Thursday's meeting, there is likely to be an effort to
>persuade the ICANN Board to slow down the at-large membership and election
>process.  I got the impression that if ICANN asks for more time, the U.S.
>government will probably agree to relax the deadlines (Becky Burr of the
>U.S. Department of Commerce attended most of the meeting).  Such a move
>would also require amendments to the ICANN by-laws.  The ICANN Board meets
>by conference call February 10, and then again at Cairo a month later, and
>could take action on this issue.
>
>[[Stepping aside from my report on the meeting, I think it would be in the
>best interests of IPC members to become better informed on this issue.  I
>suggest that a brief time be set aside at our Washington meeting for
>discussion of this question.  I will be glad to work with Mike Kirk and
>other interested parties to arrange presentations by some knowledgeable
>people. I am not suggesting that IPC necessarily take any formal position on
>at-large elections or membership, but this process, which will culminate in
>the election of half of the ICANN Board, clearly will have an impact on our
>interests in ICANN.]]
>
>Virtually nothing was said on Thursday about item (2), except that there
>would be a "study session" in Cairo to let the Board learn more about the
>issues and contending viewpoints concerning new gTLDs and famous marks.
>Similarly, I learned little about item (3), other than that there are
>"ongoing discussions" with the ccTLDs which were described as "fairly
>productive."  On item (4), it was indicated that ICANN will seek a USD 4
>million budget for its fiscal year, and is expecting to double its staff to
>14 people over the next several months.  Over one-third of this budget is
>expected to come from ccTLDs, which so far have not agreed to any formula
>for allocation of this sum.
>
>One other issue of concern to the IPC was discussed.  ICANN is initiating a
>"comprehensive compliance review program" to make sure that accredited
>registrars (now 98, of which 24 are fully operational) are fulfilling the
>obligations they assumed in their accreditation agreements.   The goal is to
>make such compliance policing a "core competence" of ICANN.  It is not clear
>what this program entails in to the short term, other than that one of the
>new ICANN hires (probably an attorney) will have this as his/her main
>function.  I intervened in strong support of the need for ICANN to ensure
>that accredited registrars are in compliance with their obligations,
>particularly regarding WHOIS.
>
>Please let me know if you have questions about this report.