-
Comunicados
More
-
Correspondencia
More
-
Asesoramiento por ítems
More
-
Principios y pautas
More
2012-04-12-IGO
Asesoramiento del GAC
2012-04-12-IGO
N/A
Consenso alcanzado
2012-04-12-IGO
Date/Source Document
12 April 2012
GAC Letter to ICANN Board regarding Protection of IGOs
Communication
'the GAC reaffirms previous advice that the IOC and Red Cross and Red Crescent should be protected at the top and second levels, given that these organizations enjoy protection at both the international level through international treaties (e.g. the Nairobi Treaty and the Geneva Conventions) and through national laws in multiple jurisdictions. The GAC considers the existence of such two-tiered protection as creating the criteria relevant to determining whether any other entities should be afforded comparable enhanced protection.
The GAC has considered the Board's request for policy advice on the expansion of protections to include IGOs, and advises that in the event that additional IGOs are found to meet the above criteria, this would be a consideration in the formulation of GAC advice for IGO protections in future rounds, as well as consideration of protections for IGOs, more generally.
Therefore, the GAC advises that no additional protections should be afforded to IGOs, beyond the current protections found in the Applicant Guidebook, for the current round.'
Date/Source Document
12 April 2012
GAC Letter to ICANN Board regarding Protection of IGOs
Communication
'the GAC reaffirms previous advice that the IOC and Red Cross and Red Crescent should be protected at the top and second levels, given that these organizations enjoy protection at both the international level through international treaties (e.g. the Nairobi Treaty and the Geneva Conventions) and through national laws in multiple jurisdictions. The GAC considers the existence of such two-tiered protection as creating the criteria relevant to determining whether any other entities should be afforded comparable enhanced protection.
The GAC has considered the Board's request for policy advice on the expansion of protections to include IGOs, and advises that in the event that additional IGOs are found to meet the above criteria, this would be a consideration in the formulation of GAC advice for IGO protections in future rounds, as well as consideration of protections for IGOs, more generally.
Therefore, the GAC advises that no additional protections should be afforded to IGOs, beyond the current protections found in the Applicant Guidebook, for the current round.'