<html dir="ltr">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<style id="owaParaStyle">P {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px
}
</style>
</head>
<body style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial,sans-serif; WORD-WRAP: break-word; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-SIZE: 14px" fPStyle="1" ocsi="0">
<div style="direction: ltr;font-family: Tahoma;color: #000000;font-size: 10pt;">
<p>Steve:</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Good work as usual.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>But this legacy statement on the URS (p.14<a></a>) is very much outdated--</p>
<p> </p>
<p style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'; COLOR: #ff6600; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">The URS is not a rapid process and takes nearly as long as using the UDRP<a></a> with a higher burden of proof.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</span>The URS provides little certainty: Even if the trademark owner wins by default, Registrant can seek de novo review up to 2 years after suspension. The suspension is temporary and only takes place for “balance of registration” period with option to extend
for one year at commercial rates.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>The URS places brand owners in a perpetual monitoring situation with no permanent ability to transfer the domain name.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</span>With a 5,000 word limit, the URS winds up being a lengthy process with little certainty for brand owners.</span></p>
<p style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'; COLOR: #ff6600; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"></span> </p>
<p style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'; COLOR: #ff6600; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><font color="#000000" size="3">In fact, I think the URS process is now substantially shorter than a UDRP<a></a>, as are its costs.
The standard registrant<a></a> response time is now 14 days; review (time for filing an appeal) has been shortened to six months. The projected filing fee will be about $300 and the complainant word limit has been cut to 500. On behalf<a></a> of ICA I am not
pleased with all these changes, but the BC statement should be accurate and reflect the present Guidebook. ICANN<a></a> has even adopted a form of "loser pays" targeted<a></a> at mass cybersquatters<a></a>.</font></span></p>
<p style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'; COLOR: #ff6600; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><font color="#000000" size="3"></font></span> </p>
<p style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'; COLOR: #ff6600; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><font color="#000000" size="3">As for this statement on p.1<a></a> -- <span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA">RPMs</span><a></a>
are still substantially weaker than those recommended by the IRT<a></a>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> --</span></span></font></span></p>
<p style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'; COLOR: #ff6600; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
<o:p><font color="#000000" size="3">I would suggest actually going back to review what the IRT<a></a> recommended and then measuring what's in the Guidebook now. Anyway, if the BC is going to cite the IRT<a></a> it also should be candid that some of what it
is advocating goes beyond the IRT<a></a>. </font></o:p></span></p>
<p style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'; COLOR: #ff6600; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><o:p><font color="#000000" size="3"></font></o:p></span> </p>
<p style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'; COLOR: #ff6600; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><o:p><font color="#000000" size="3">For example, the IRT<a></a> never recommended a domain transfer option through URS in order
to preserve a fundamental distinction with the UDRP<a></a> (as well as to avoid the possibility of reverse domain hijacking through a low-cost, expedited<a></a> process). Now the Board said in Brussels that it would acquiesce to the GAC<a></a> request for
a transfer option -- but that is not reflected in the new Guidebook language, and the request<a></a> disappeared from the GAC's<a></a> recent response on rights protection issues. Perhaps that's because many individuals<a></a> (including me) spoke out in SF
against departing from the IRT<a></a> position and fudging that fundamental distinction between the UDRP<a></a> and URS.
</font></o:p></span></p>
<p style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'; COLOR: #ff6600; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><o:p><font color="#000000" size="3"></font></o:p></span> </p>
<p style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'; COLOR: #ff6600; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><o:p><font color="#000000" size="3">Before reflexively reasserting a demand for a transfer<a></a> option I hope BC members would
seriously consider the alternative that I advocated in SF (which I did after speaking with a large number of IP advocates, all of whom reacted favorably) -- which would be to have<a></a> a domain on the losing end of a URS action<a></a> placed on a permanent
"do not re-register" list. That would relieve complainants of both continuing monitoring burdens and registration costs for unwanted domains, while preserving a critical distinction with the UDRP<a></a> and assuring registrants that the URS could not be abused
for domain hijacking. I thought it was a win-win when I voiced it in SF and still do now.</font></o:p></span></p>
<p style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'; COLOR: #ff6600; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><o:p><font color="#000000" size="3"></font></o:p></span> </p>
<p style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'; COLOR: #ff6600; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><o:p><font color="#000000" size="3">Best regards,</font></o:p></span></p>
<p style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'; COLOR: #ff6600; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><o:p><font color="#000000" size="3">Philip</font></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p> </p>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; FONT-SIZE: 13px">
<p><strong><font color="#000080">Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal</font></strong></p>
<p><strong><font color="#000080"><a></a><strong><font color="#000080">Virtualaw</font></strong> LLC</font></strong></p>
<p><strong><font color="#000080">1155 F Street, NW</font></strong></p>
<p><strong><font color="#000080">Suite 1050</font></strong></p>
<p><strong><font color="#000080">Washington, DC 20004</font></strong></p>
<p><strong><font color="#000080">202-559-8597/Direct</font></strong></p>
<p><strong><font color="#000080">202-559-8750/Fax</font></strong></p>
<p><strong><font color="#000080">202-255-6172/cell</font></strong></p>
<p><strong><font color="#000080"></font></strong> </p>
<p><em><strong><font color="#000080">"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey</font></strong></em></p>
<p><font color="#000080"></font> </p>
</div>
</div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 16px">
<hr tabindex="-1">
<div style="DIRECTION: ltr" id="divRpF668139"><font color="#000000" size="2" face="Tahoma"><b>From:</b> owner-bc-gnso@icann.org [owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] on behalf of Steve DelBianco [sdelbianco@netchoice.org]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, April 27, 2011 2:57 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'bc-GNSO@icann.org GNSO list'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [bc-gnso] Draft v1 of BC comments on latest gTLD Guidebook<br>
</font><br>
</div>
<div></div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Per discussion on our 21-Apr member call, here is a draft framework for BC comments on the 15-Apr-2011 Guidebook.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This comment period and docs are described at <a href="http://icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-6-en.htm" target="_blank">http://icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-6-en.htm</a> </div>
<div>These comments are due 15-May, giving us 18 days for edits, review, and approval.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>For this initial draft, I updated our Dec-2010 Guidebook comments in several ways:</div>
<blockquote style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 40px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 0px">
<div>- Acknowledged areas where ICANN made changes consistent with BC recommendations.</div>
<div>- Moved all our RPM concerns to Module 5</div>
<div>- Asked several questions for BC members (in red) </div>
<div>- Added a proposed definition for "Single-Registrant TLD". We may hold a separate call on this.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>All BC members are invited to suggest edits. Please use track changes and circulate to BC list. </div>
<div>I will assemble another draft version with all changes received as of May 1. </div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Below are the primary contributors from our Dec-2011 comments, organized by module. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 40px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 0px">
<div>Module 1: Introduction to New gTLD Application Process and Fees. (Berry Cobb, Ron Andruff )</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Module 2: Evaluation Procedures. (Philip Sheppard, Jon Nevett, Adam Palmer, Zahid Jamil, Sarah Deutsch )</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Module 3: Dispute Resolution. ( John Berard, Ron Andruff )</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Module 4: String Contention. ( Ron Andruff )</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Module 5: Transition to Delegation; Registry Agreement, Code of Conduct, RPMs</div>
<div>( Philip Sheppard, Fred Fellman, Berry Cobb, Jon Nevett, Sarah Deutsch )</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 40px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 0px">
<div><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Other notes:</div>
<blockquote style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 40px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 0px">
<div>In our SFO comments, the BC said the new gTLD communications plan should help the world's businesses and users understand changes coming in the DNS. But I didn't see anything in the latest Guidebook about the Communications Plan. So that comment was not
reflected in the attached draft. </div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Steve DelBianco</div>
<div>vice chair for policy coordination</div>
<blockquote style="BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 40px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; PADDING-TOP: 0px">
<div><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION">
<div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial,sans-serif; WORD-WRAP: break-word; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)">
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION">
<div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial,sans-serif; WORD-WRAP: break-word; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)">
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION">
<div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial,sans-serif; WORD-WRAP: break-word; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)">
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION">
<div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial,sans-serif; WORD-WRAP: break-word; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)">
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION">
<div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: Calibri,sans-serif; WORD-WRAP: break-word; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)">
<div>
<blockquote style="BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 40px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; PADDING-TOP: 0px">
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</span></div>
</div>
</span></div>
</div>
</span></div>
</div>
</span></div>
</div>
</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<hr size="1" noshade="">
<p class="avgcert" align="left" color="#000000">No virus found in this message.<br>
Checked by AVG - <a href="http://www.avg.com" target="_blank">www.avg.com</a><br>
Version: 10.0.1209 / Virus Database: 1500/3600 - Release Date: 04/27/11</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>