[Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Mp3, AC Chat & Attendance for IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection PDP WG

[Michelle DeSmyter]

Dear All,

Please find the attendance and MP3 recording for the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection PDP WG Meeting held on Thursday, 20 October 2016 at 17:00 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-crp-wg-19oct16-en.mp3
On page: https://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#oct
The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page:
http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar-23nov&d=DQMF-g&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=8_WhWIPqsLT6TmF1Zmyci866vcPSFO4VShFqESGe_5iHWGlBLwwwehFBfjrsjWv9&m=wBBn3Ar2_mvUeGcM8rpOAyluUFEJFG5lASQ-cAccI2k&s=3BfiwO43tzwlrIbIyBY4Q-14zsFQCX518fLLR8GWR7I&e=>

Attendees:
David Maher - PIR
George Kirikos – Individual
Jay Chapman – Individual
Mason Cole – RySG
Neescha Vreeling (for Jim Bikoff) - IPC
Paul Tattersfield – Individual
Petter Rindforth - IPC
Phil Corwin - BC
Reg Levy – RySG

Apologies:

ICANN staff:
Mary Wong
Steve Chan
Berry Cobb
Michelle DeSmyter

** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **

Mailing list archives:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/

Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/wSC4Aw


Thank you.
Kind regards,
Michelle DeSmyter

-------------------------------
Adobe Connect chat transcript for Thursday, 20 October 2016
Michelle DeSmyter: Dear All, Welcome to the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms WG on Thursday, 19 October 2016 at 17:00 UTC.
  George Kirikos:Hi folks.
  George Kirikos:Is this the last call before the ICANN57 meeting?
  Reg Levy - MMX:by all of the gods, I sure hope so.
  George Kirikos::-)
  Mary Wong:Yes, no WG meeting till ICANN57 week
  George Kirikos:Thanks Mary.
  Paul Tattersfield:Hi everyone
  George Kirikos:Welcome Paul.
  Paul Tattersfield:THanks George, do you evr travel to ICANN meetings?
  Paul Tattersfield:ever
  George Kirikos:No, I've never been to one (and don't plan to attend either).
  George Kirikos:How about yourself?
  Paul Tattersfield:I went to a minor one in London  a few years ago
  Philip Corwin:dialing in
  Mary Wong:@Phil, you're chairing today, yes?
  Philip Corwin:yes
  Michelle DeSmyter:Neescha Vreeling for Jim Bikoff is on audio only
  Mary Wong:Specifically, recs 2 & 3 from the proposal (bottom of page 2 and into page 3 of the document)
  Mary Wong:Sorry, page 2 and 3 of the proposal - it starts on page 4 in the display
  Mary Wong:Document is unsync'ed for scrolling
  George Kirikos:Should we do the planning first, perhaps?
  George Kirikos:+1 Phil
  George Kirikos:In relation to costs, WIPO recently (this week) announced a program to subsidize patent costs for those in developing countries, see: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.einnews.com_pr-5Fnews_349725663_wipo-2Dlaunches-2Dglobal-2Dprogram-2Dto-2Dhelp-2Dboost-2Daccess-2Dto-2Dpatent-2Dsystem-2Dfor-2Dinventors-2Dwith-2Dlimited-2Dmeans&d=DQIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=8_WhWIPqsLT6TmF1Zmyci866vcPSFO4VShFqESGe_5iHWGlBLwwwehFBfjrsjWv9&m=lMcCr3poMdxnVYTND8tBk713gg7liIzhOaS7D-8MFs0&s=affitSdPruZ5o79dVK1gSukl_dKM8NE2tMQAEzk8la0&e=
  George Kirikos:So, perhaps "needy" IGOs might look to WIPO for subsidies.
  George Kirikos:(and perhaps some law firms would represent IGOs on a pro bono basis)
  George Kirikos:WIPO itself is well funded, but perhaps some IGOs are poorer.
  Paul Tattersfield:Agree with George there are a lot on non IGO orgnaizations who suffer similar problems outlined in the small group report and I think ICANN should be devoting resources to solving the issues for all rather than s small subset of entities
  George Kirikos:A public list of lawyers/law firms willing to do pro bono might be an "easy" route to try to accomondate their request.
  George Kirikos:(and help other needy complainants/respondents)
  George Kirikos:Here's the list of eligibility criteria for .INT: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.iana.org_domains_int_policy&d=DQIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=8_WhWIPqsLT6TmF1Zmyci866vcPSFO4VShFqESGe_5iHWGlBLwwwehFBfjrsjWv9&m=lMcCr3poMdxnVYTND8tBk713gg7liIzhOaS7D-8MFs0&s=izecIGbhsrqMF6QSyvRsrOgcpLHnuVuRuBRSTgmEQao&e=
  Paul Tattersfield:As well as standing for URS (& UDRP) marks protected by statute or treaty are specfically catered for in the TMCH
  George Kirikos:Everyone considers themselves "special", though.
  George Kirikos:That's not something I find compelling.
  Mary Wong:@Phil, possibly, yes
  George Kirikos:It's better to use Article 6ter, rather than create a parallel ad hoc policy.
  Paul Tattersfield:they have to have standing if they are public facing
  George Kirikos:Article 6ter reflects international law/treaty. Ad hoc = making it up informally as we go along.
  Mary Wong:@George, as staff noted previously as well, Article 6ter can be viewed as not conferring substantive legal rights.
  George Kirikos:Under one interpretation....but, I think it's sufficient to meet the 1st test of the UDRP/URS, to give standing to use the procedures.
  George Kirikos:And common law (even without Article 6ter) is sufficient, too.
  Mary Wong:@George, that's the distinguishing point (of disagreement) - 6ter isn't based on substantive legal rights like trademark/common law rights; it's basically international comity agreeing to an initial form of protection.
  George Kirikos:I think 1.7 of the WIPO overview is sufficient, see: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.wipo.int_amc_en_domains_search_overview2.0_-2317&d=DQIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=8_WhWIPqsLT6TmF1Zmyci866vcPSFO4VShFqESGe_5iHWGlBLwwwehFBfjrsjWv9&m=lMcCr3poMdxnVYTND8tBk713gg7liIzhOaS7D-8MFs0&s=Ycp0zQm2NTZCv1CZDdrniaHj4dF8bthYlc-6dLpkgLY&e=  (e.g. "media recognition")
  Paul Tattersfield:https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.trademark-2Dclearinghouse.com_content_marks-2Dprotected-2Dstatute-2Dor-2Dtreaty&d=DQIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=8_WhWIPqsLT6TmF1Zmyci866vcPSFO4VShFqESGe_5iHWGlBLwwwehFBfjrsjWv9&m=lMcCr3poMdxnVYTND8tBk713gg7liIzhOaS7D-8MFs0&s=7AZYIxAQ5mZ9c4L_nr-_OEh3fLAM6UM8gxCzvaDBMlA&e=
  Berry Cobb:Just as a reminder about the small group proposal, is that its scope only applies to New gTLDs and not the legacy gTLDs or ccTLDs.
  George Kirikos:1.7 even says "the availability of trademark-like protection" (suggesting that rights need not be exactly arising from TM law)
  Mary Wong:I will try to find a redlined version
  George Kirikos:#6 was there before.
  Paul Tattersfield:@Berry doesn't the Executive summary refere to all gTLDs?
  Mary Wong:We put Rec 6 in as more of a placeholder, really.
  Mary Wong:@Paul, I believe the proposal makes clear that it is only for New gTLDs?
  Paul Tattersfield:Why do you think they would do that Mary?
  Berry Cobb:I'm looking now.  But the GAC advice that set all this in motion was only for New gTLDs.
  Mary Wong:The proposal says "It describes a process whereby an Eligible IGO (as defined in this Paper) may be notified of a third party registration of its acronym in a new gTLD launched under ICANN’s New gTLD Program, as well as the proposed establishment of appropriate dispute resolution processes to enable protection of an Eligible IGO’s acronym in appropriate circumstances in all gTLDs."
  Mary Wong:I stand corrected, Paul - it is the preventive part that is for New gTLDs
  Petter Rindforth:Yes, I think it is the best way to proceed right now
  George Kirikos:Can staff send out invites for the ICANN57 meetings when they're available? (with the links, and times) I think the time zone differences are very odd, so it'd help folks to not have to navigate the website)
  Mary Wong:@George, we will
  George Kirikos:(the remote participation won't be via this Adobe room, by the way; folks will have to use a different Adobe link)
  George Kirikos:Thanks Mary.
  George Kirikos:Perhaps talking about the workarounds (assignment, licensing) "live" might be helpful, to help bridge the gap with any IGOs in attendance there, as that goes to the crux of their concerns over immunity.
  George Kirikos:I know the new gTLD registries are upset about all the blocking, so hopefully they'll be in attendance, as we move to a solution in our work.
  Petter Rindforth:Mary - i presume that we can use the main part of our previous general initial presentation to start with
  Paul Tattersfield:Agree Phil
  Mary Wong:We will circulate an updated Section 6 next week, with the chairs' input - and hopefully a Deliberations draft; but we agree with Phil; we suggest that the Deliberations draft more likely be for "internal" WG review to make sure staff has captured the main points.
  George Kirikos:*6 to mute/unmute
  George Kirikos:So, December? Or earlier that week?
  George Kirikos:Using the mailing list, etc. seems a good idea to me.
  Mary Wong:Oh, please note - ICANN is closed the week between Christmasa nd New Year
  Mary Wong::)
  Jay Chapman:thanks all
  George Kirikos:Bye folks.
  Paul Tattersfield:thanks all, bye

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/attachments/20161021/2e5fcbef/attachment-0001.html>