[bc-gnso] RE: Updated draft for approval on 14-Jan: BC comment on Strawman Solution

Mon Jan 14 13:00:09 UTC 2013

Steve,

Thanks for the good work on the comments.  I have two comments.  First, on the Claims 2 notice, I would urge the following change:  "Accordingly, the BC supports a reasonable fee for the notice service PROVIDED THE CLAIMS 2 NOTICE CONTAINS THE SAME INFORMATION AND AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT BY THE REGISTRANT AS THE CLAIMS 1 NOTICE"  Without this change, it could be misread to mean the BC supports the business community paying all the costs for a an ineffective notice.

The comments again appear to be silent on the changes we are seeking to the URS.  Even though that issue is on a separate track at ICANN, this paper seems to be the place to remind them of the substantive remedies the IPC/BC working group proposed as a key priority, such as a real loser pays model and a permanent suspension remedy.  I would urge at least a few sentences on the importance of making the URS a meaningful (and not just low cost) remedy.

Sarah

From: owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso at icann.org] On Behalf Of Steve DelBianco
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2013 9:29 PM
To: bc - GNSO list
Subject: [bc-gnso] Updated draft for approval on 14-Jan: BC comment on Strawman Solution

The attached update is for discussion and final approval during our 14-Jan member call.

I've updated the original draft per suggestions from Ron Andruff, John Berard, Elisa Cooper, and Sara Deutsch. A redline is also attached to show those changes from the 2-Jan draft.

The BC will submit these comments on 15-Jan.  We will also be able to submit Reply comments thru 5-Feb.

From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco at netchoice.org<mailto:sdelbianco at netchoice.org>>
Date: Wednesday, January 2, 2013 5:44 PM
To: bc - GNSO list <bc-gnso at icann.org<mailto:bc-gnso at icann.org>>
Subject: DRAFT for review: BC comment on Strawman Solution

BC members:

In Toronto , the BC/IPC/ISPC requested improved Rights Protection Measures (RPMs).  That prompted ICANN executive management to host follow-up meetings with multiple stakeholders.   As a result, ICANN posted a "strawman solution" for public comment (link<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/about/trademark-clearinghouse/strawman-solution-03dec12-en.pdf>).    Public comments are due by 16-Jan-2013.

Attached is a draft BC comment on the Strawman solution, based on prior BC positions and discussions, email exchanges with BC members, and initial review by the ex comm.

Per the BC charter, this draft is posted for 14 days of review and comment.  As soon as possible, please REPLY ALL with your suggested edits to these comments.   If any BC member objects to the BC filing the attached draft comment , please REPLY ALL and indicate your objection and reason.

We plan to finalize and submit these comments on 16-Jan-2013.

--
Steve DelBianco
BC vice chair for policy coordination

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bc-gnso/attachments/20130114/43cea829/attachment.html>