This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
CONFERENCE CALL


Te policy development process working group on translation and transliteration of contact information had several meetings related to questions on whether it is desirable to translate contact information (Whois) to a single common language or


transliterate contact information


to a single common script, and who shall be responsible for the translation or transliteration in light of the extra costs involved for such a service. Other related questions are whether translation or transliteration should be mandatory for all generic TLDs, and whether they should apply to all registrants or only those based in certain countries (using non-ASCII scripts).


From an IP point of view, it is clear that without the proper translation or transliteration of contact information, the Whois system will lose its clarity, which may cause difficulties for domain name holders in confirming that they have up-to-date and correct contact information. It


www.trademarksandbrandsonline.com


may also cause unnecessary legal actions and/or alternative dispute resolution actions where the holder of a domain name could not be properly identified and contacted. In fact, the combination of contact information in both the holder’s local language and a worldwide acceptable translation or transliteration should provide an adequate legal basis for the sufficient identification of contact information in national legal actions, as well in global domain dispute cases.


Te working group will finalise and submit its initial report in mid-September, and the GNSO Council will decide on a motion at its December 11, 2014 meeting. 


Petter Rindforth is a senior partner at Fenix Legal KB and a member of ICANN’s GNSO Council. He can be contacted at: info@fenixlegal.eu


Petter Rindforth is a trained mediator and serves as a domain name dispute panellist for WIPO, the NAF, Czech Arbitration Court and .se, and as a special reporter (domain names) for the IP organisation FICPI, representing FICPI in ICANN’s IP constituency (IPC), and representing IPC in the GNSO Council.


Trademarks & Brands Online


Volume 3, Issue 2


41


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60