[bc-gnso] FW: STI-DT -- BC preliminary position statements
Phil Corwin
pcorwin at butera-andrews.com
Wed Oct 28 03:55:45 UTC 2009
Related question -
Did we decide on the BC rep to the STI review team? And is the first STI meeting still scheduled for thursday, 5-6:30 in Astor on 36th floor?
Thanks!
Philip S. Corwin
Partner, Butera & Andrews
1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Suite 500
Washington, DC 20004
2026635347/Office
2022556172/Cell
"Luck is the residue of design." -- Branch Rickey
________________________________
From: owner-bc-gnso at icann.org <owner-bc-gnso at icann.org>
To: 'Marilyn Cade' <marilynscade at hotmail.com>; michael at palage.com <michael at palage.com>; 'bc - GNSO list' <bc-gnso at icann.org>
Sent: Tue Oct 27 22:56:22 2009
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] FW: STI-DT -- BC preliminary position statements
Indeed Marilyn. You are right. The members at the meeting agreed but the draft position will be posted to the list for input allowing members that were not in the meeting to also have the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Zahid Jamil
Barrister-at-law
Jamil & Jamil
Barristers-at-law
219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
Cell: +923008238230
Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025
Fax: +92 21 5655026
www.jamilandjamil.com<http://www.jamilandjamil.com/>
Notice / Disclaimer
This message contains confidential information and its contents are being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are the intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law, and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and consent of Jamil & Jamil is prohibited.
From: Marilyn Cade [mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:44 AM
To: Zahid Jamil; michael at palage.com; bc - GNSO list
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] FW: STI-DT -- BC preliminary position statements
Zahid, just one clarification. Otherwise fully agree.
We agreed, i think, that the members that we had to reach an agreement within the members who were in the room, and based on the emails that were being posted to the list.
That's the going in position, right? We all realize that we are relying upon the earlier BC positions, but modified by the evolving situation, right? and realizing that we had to try to reach a 'rough' consensus within the meeting.
________________________________
From: zahid at dndrc.com
To: michael at palage.com; bc-gnso at icann.org
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] FW: STI-DT -- BC preliminary position statements
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 11:35:13 +0900
Thanks for the query Michael,
The BC meeting yesterday led to member’s developing a position. I would suggest that it is up to our membership which (minus one member) agreed to proposals that were discussed in the constructive session moderated by Mike R.
Sincerely,
Zahid Jamil
Barrister-at-law
Jamil & Jamil
Barristers-at-law
219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
Cell: +923008238230
Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025
Fax: +92 21 5655026
www.jamilandjamil.com<http://www.jamilandjamil.com/>
Notice / Disclaimer
This message contains confidential information and its contents are being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are the intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law, and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and consent of Jamil & Jamil is prohibited.
From: Michael D. Palage [mailto:michael at palage.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:21 AM
To: 'Zahid Jamil'; 'BC gnso'
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] FW: STI-DT -- BC preliminary position statements
Zahid,
Is it really constructive to advocate positions that go above and beyond the initial recommendations contained in the IRT?
Best regards,
Michael
From: owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso at icann.org] On Behalf Of Zahid Jamil
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 10:13 PM
To: 'BC gnso'
Subject: [bc-gnso] FW: STI-DT -- BC preliminary position statements
Dear All,
Will be sending out a draft of our position on the STI. Here’s something helpful Mike R put together.
Sincerely,
Zahid Jamil
Barrister-at-law
Jamil & Jamil
Barristers-at-law
219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
Cell: +923008238230
Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025
Fax: +92 21 5655026
www.jamilandjamil.com<http://www.jamilandjamil.com/>
Notice / Disclaimer
This message contains confidential information and its contents are being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are the intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law, and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and consent of Jamil & Jamil is prohibited.
From: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike at rodenbaugh.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:08 AM
To: 'Zahid Jamil'
Cc: 'Philip Sheppard'
Subject: RE: STI-DT -- BC preliminary position statements
TM Clearinghouse:
1. Sunrise processes must be standardized and mandatory.
2. TM notices (misnamed “IP claims”) must be mandatory:
a. All applications for newTLD domain registrations will be checked against the TMC, regardless whether application is during sunrise period or thereafter
b. If applied-for domain string anywhere contains text of trademark listed in TMC, then TM notice given to applicant per proposal listed in Staff recommendation, if domain is registered then TM owner is notified
c. TM owners will have option also to trigger notices in the event that applied-for domain string includes the trademark string altered by typographical errors, as determined by an algorithmic tool. For example, yaho0.new would trigger a notice if Yahoo! elected to exercise this option.
d. Domain applicant must affirmatively respond to the TM notice, either on screen or email, and registrar must maintain written records of such responses for every domain name. TM owner must get notice of every registration that occurs.
URS:
1. Process as detailed by Staff must be mandatory in all newTLD registries
a. Substantive standard of UDRP must be exactly replicated in URS
2. Successful complainant must have option to transfer the name or cancel, if no appeal filed within 90 days from date of URS decision.
a. Successful complainant must also have option to have domain suspended until end of its current registration term, and then indefinitely flagged
b. Flag shall be recorded in clearinghouse so that if anyone seeks to register such name(s) again, they would get a notice.
3. Complainant abuse shall be defined same as Reverse Domain Name Hijacking under UDRP.
4. Meaningful appeal process required, Staff hasn’t made any proposal on that yet, so we cannot comment.
Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
548 Market Street
San Francisco, CA 94104
(415) 738-8087<http://service.ringcentral.com/ringme/callback.asp?mbid=57178438,0,&referer=http://rodenbaugh.com/contact>
http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
From: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike at rodenbaugh.com]
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 11:56 PM
To: 'Zahid Jamil'
Cc: 'Philip Sheppard'
Subject: STI-DT -- BC preliminary position statements
BC position on TM Clearinghouse and URS, notes for preliminary statement:
Note the attendance at the meeting (Philip has it).
TMC -- sunrise processes must be standard AND mandatory IP claims, POST-launch – unanimous except Palage -- scope of what triggers a hit, proposal is vague as to ‘yahoo’, or ‘yahoomail’ or ‘yaho0’ or ‘yahhoo’?? We require notice if TM string is replicated anywhere in the domain name that is applied for (except Palage). TM owners can elect how widely the notices would be sent, either to exact matches anywhere in the name, or also algorithmic typos. Domain applicant MUST affirmatively respond to the notice, either on screen or email. TM owner must get notice of every registration that occurs.
URS – mandatory in all newTLD registries (unanimous except for ICA, who thinks in effect it will be adopted by everyone anyway); substantive standard of UDRP must be exactly replicated in URS; procedural elements and evidentiary threshold of Staff proposal; sanctions for complainant abuse (abuse defined same as Reverse Domain Name Hijacking under UDRP); meaningful appeal process required, Staff hasn’t made any proposal on that yet, so we cannot comment. Successful complainant must have option to transfer the name or cancel, if no appeal filed within 90 days from date of URS decision. Some members also would support an indefinite suspension, recorded in clearinghouse so that if anyone seeks to register again, they would get a notice.
GPML – VRZN, Nokia, NetChoice & Marilyn think it should still be on the table, but not a deal-breaker, nobody else supports leaving it on the table.
PDDM
Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
548 Market Street
San Francisco, CA 94104
(415) 738-8087<http://service.ringcentral.com/ringme/callback.asp?mbid=57178438,0,&referer=http://rodenbaugh.com/contact>
http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bc-gnso/attachments/20091027/0aca5ff3/attachment.html>
More information about the Bc-gnso
mailing list