[Gnso-newgtld-dg] - Reminder: Submit Issues & Nominations for Group Chair(s)

Thu Sep 11 09:27:03 UTC 2014

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Tobias, all,
I am more than happy to explain.

The author wrote about generic terms that have been entered into the
TMCH for the purpose of registering domain names during the sunrise
period.

I confirmed that a lot of trademarks have been applied for with the
obvious intention to game the system by adding additional elements to
the generic term or by registering the trademarks for unrelated
classes of goods and services.

The issue woud not have arisen - at least to that extent - if the
original idea of a cut-off date, which was the day or the day before
the board decision on the new gTLD program was taken in Paris, would
have made its way to the final version of the AGB. The cut-off date is
sill there, but now it only applies to treaty-based protection. This
seems to be a drafting error, but the result is that we are now facing
a situation where only Governments are prevented from gaming the
system by creating treaties for the purpose of domain grabbing :-).

Best,
Thomas

Am 10.09.2014 um 20:32 schrieb Tobias Sattler:
> I would also raise another point: Reviewing TMCH.
> 
> There is a good German article covering it
> http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Das-Trademark-Clearinghouse-und-die-neuen-Domains-Ein-Paradies-fuer-Markentrolle-2384866.html
>
>  For the non-German speakers; The article says that there are quite
> a number of new trademarks in the TMCH like “taxi”, “sex”, “auto”, 
> “immobilen”, “cloud”, “bank”, “villa”, “blog”, “golf” and “party”.
> 
> These trademarks are mostly "word and design mark” and if you look
> up for instance the trademark “immobilen” at the Austrian patent
> office it says "?I?M?M?O?B?I?L?I?E?N?”.
> 
> The whole TMCH thing is quite hard to communicate to customers and
> we experienced that most of our customers are dropping out because
> of a claim notice. Well, you can argue that in both ways, but if
> the TMCH get “gamed” like that I don’t want to imagine how things
> will evolve in subsequents rounds.
> 
> Thomas Rickert, who is also part of this discussion group, may
> explain it a bitter better than I do. (sorry Thomas to put you on
> the spot)
> 
> Tobias
> 
> On 08.09.2014, at 15:05, Tobias Sattler <sattler at united-domains.de 
> <mailto:sattler at united-domains.de>> wrote:
> 
>> Dear Steve,
>> 
>> I would also like to add some points from our point of view:
>> 
>> 1.) Usage of AROS (Automated Registrar Onboarding System)
>> 
>> 2.) “Standardization” of Registry Registrar Agreements. I
>> wouldn’t go that far to say all RRA’s have to be the same, but it
>> would help if they would be more similar.
>> 
>> 3.) Reviewing Premium-Names, there are currently to many
>> different ways of selling and maintaining them.
>> 
>> 4.) Reviewing “Highly regulated TLDs”, how they should be
>> handled.
>> 
>> 5.) Reviewing Name Collision, it is a pain to explain to
>> customers.
>> 
>> 6.) More transparency in contracting (NDA’s, signed RRA, side
>> letters, etc.). I doubt that every registrar has the same RRA
>> signed and NDA’s are floating around before you actually get the
>> RRA, etc.
>> 
>> Best regards, Tobias
>> 
>> On 03.09.2014, at 00:19, Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org 
>> <mailto:steve.chan at icann.org>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Dear DG Members,
>>> 
>>> This is a friendly reminder to please contribute your list of
>>> issues to the Wiki group workspace 
>>> (https://community.icann.org/display/DGNGSR/3.+DG+Workspace) or
>>> to the email list. To provide a bit of additional clarification
>>> on what information might prove useful, as Bret spoke to on the
>>> first call, the issues can be big, can be small, specific to
>>> you or a group you represent, or what may be considered a
>>> widely held observation about the New gTLD Program. Issues
>>> should at a minimum include enough detail so that others can
>>> properly understand the issue. If you would like to make the
>>> issue description more detailed, you can consider the elements
>>> in the Request for Issue Report template found in Annex 2 of
>>> the PDP Manual found here 
>>> (http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/annex-2-pdp-manual-16may13-en.pdf).
>>>
>>> 
Contributing a preliminary set of issues now would of course not
>>> preclude the submission of additional, or revision of,
>>> existing issues at a later date. Provided enough contributions
>>> are received, I would like to be able to take a first cut at
>>> categorizing those issues to facilitate the discussion at the
>>> next meeting, scheduled for Monday, 8 Sept 2014 at 14:00 UTC.
>>> 
>>> Please also be aware that it was discussed on the August 11th
>>> call that the group should aim to elect leaders at the
>>> subsequent meeting. If you would like to nominate yourself or
>>> someone else, please do so over the email list. From
>>> conversations over the list in early August, it seemed that the
>>> group was leaning towards perhaps a pair of co-chairs.
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> *Steven Chan* Sr. Policy Manager
>>> 
>>> *ICANN *12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA
>>> 90094-2536 steve.chan at icann.org <mailto:steve.chan at icann.org> 
>>> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel:
>>> +1.310.301.5800 fax: +1.310.823.8649 
>>> _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-dg
>>> mailing list Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org
>>> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org> 
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-dg
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-dg
>> mailing list Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org
>> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org> 
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-dg
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-dg
> mailing list Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org 
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-dg
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUEWrnAAoJECGcZEVUvnjeqWIIAIyibieJqOfF1gBYq7cdx8La
V/g+Th2Tqe5a12itGpb/OorS85FwR1IXr1/xd63Uyd4h2siw+faCITEnArqrriNV
HaHhlAvO4jXWzWQQ0MOaF2n+4kSY2vFrHmxWC0oPUHjx+gJvzYH7jKK/gw97JpiS
bjjkIWe8SxlBWSfT3is6+dMeIqqr0Zq2yGgE79FdTn316Ph2ahqGzPVqZoMUDb2N
JFOqxc5vnVbXbhXKE7n9VCEP3Cb4eGH41KxXUy3vceVvnCOLFY+3yLcQatGri5LU
G45to70Wyt6hD4wKcUL1Sb1YLS4n2SGpVqT4/S770QxFX+vS88sbiZCSujQRFP8=
=kJkr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----