<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Paul, I wasn't suggesting we dismiss what SCOTUS said, but as we well know, there could be room to distinguish court decisions. But I will read the SCOTUS judgment, thanks to you.<br><br>Rubens, sorry to not be helpful here - I don't know - but it's not inconceivable to me that a (supreme) court of a different jurisdiction may choose to hold a different view.<br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><br>Kind regards,<br><br>Justine<br>---</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, 2 Jul 2020 at 11:53, Rubens Kuhl <<a href="mailto:rubensk@nic.br">rubensk@nic.br</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div style="overflow-wrap: break-word;"><div><br></div>Is there a position on generic trademarks in general from WIPO ? <div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Rubens</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>On 2 Jul 2020, at 00:05, Justine Chew <<a href="mailto:justine.chew@gmail.com" target="_blank">justine.chew@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br><div><div dir="ltr">Hi Paul, thanks for the pdf. <br><br>I can't help but to wonder what might happen if a (supreme) court of another jurisdiction were to hold a different view. <br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><br>Kind regards,<br><br>Justine<br>---</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, 2 Jul 2020 at 10:49, McGrady, Paul D. <<a href="mailto:PMcGrady@taftlaw.com" target="_blank">PMcGrady@taftlaw.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US">
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><span>Thanks Justine. I’ve attached a PDF for you. I’m not familiar with the contents of the other commentary article you mention, but I think the actual opinion by Ginsburg makes it clear that the per se rule is quite
abolished at the USPTO. <u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span>The Justice writes:<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right:0.05in;margin-left:0.05in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:0.1in;line-height:13.2pt;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.25pt">“The PTO’s principal concern is that trademark protection for a term like “</span><a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.25pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.25pt">”
would hinder competitors. But the PTO does not assert that others seeking to offer online hotel-reservation services need to call their services “</span><a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.25pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.25pt">.”
Rather, the PTO fears that trademark protection for “</span><a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.25pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.25pt">” could exclude or inhibit competitors
from using the term “booking” or adopting domain names like “</span><a href="http://ebooking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.25pt">ebooking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.25pt">” or “</span><a href="http://hotel-booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.25pt">hotel-booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.25pt">.”
Brief for Petitioners 27–28. The PTO’s objection, therefore, is not to exclusive use of “</span><a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.25pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.25pt">”
as a mark, but to undue control over similar language, </span><i><span style="letter-spacing:0.25pt">i.e.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.25pt">, “booking,” that others should remain free to use.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right:0.05in;margin-left:0.05in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:0.1in;line-height:13.2pt;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.3pt">That concern attends any descriptive mark. Responsive to it, trademark law hems in the scope of such marks short of denying trademark protection altogether. Notably, a competitor’s use does not
infringe a mark unless it is likely to confuse consumers. See §§1114(1), 1125(a)(1)(A); 4 McCarthy §23:1.50 (collecting state law). In assessing the likelihood of confusion, courts consider the mark’s distinctiveness: “The weaker a mark, the fewer are the
junior uses that will trigger a likelihood of consumer confusion.” 2 </span><i><span style="letter-spacing:0.3pt">id.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.3pt">, §11:76. When a mark incorporates generic or highly descriptive
components, consumers are less likely to think that other uses of the common element emanate from the mark’s owner.
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:0.3pt">Ibid. </span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.3pt">Similarly, “[i]n a ‘crowded’ field of look-alike marks” (</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:0.3pt">e.g.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.3pt">,
hotel names including the word “grand”), consumers “may have learned to carefully pick out” one mark from another.
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:0.3pt">Id.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.3pt">, §11:85. And even where some consumer confusion exists, the doctrine known as classic fair use, see
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:0.3pt">id.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.3pt">, §11:45, protects from liability anyone who uses a descriptive term, “fairly and in good faith” and “otherwise than as a mark,”
merely to describe her own goods. 15 U. S. C. §1115(b)(4); see </span><i><span style="letter-spacing:0.3pt">KP Permanent Make-Up</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.3pt">,
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:0.3pt">Inc. </span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.3pt">v.
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:0.3pt">Lasting Impression I</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.3pt">,
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:0.3pt">Inc.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.3pt">, 543 U. S. 111, 122–123 (2004).<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right:0.05in;margin-left:0.05in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:0.1in;line-height:13.2pt;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt">These doctrines guard against the anticompetitive effects the PTO identifies, ensuring that registration of “</span><a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt">”
would not yield its holder a monopoly on the term “booking.” </span><a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt"> concedes that “</span><a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt">”
would be a “weak” mark. Tr. of Oral Arg. 66. See also </span><i><span style="letter-spacing:0.35pt">id.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt">, at 42–43, 55. The mark is descriptive,
</span><a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt"> recognizes, making it “harder . . . to show a likelihood of confusion.”
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:0.35pt">Id.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt">, at 43. Furthermore, because its mark is one of many “similarly worded marks,”
</span><a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt"> accepts that close variations are unlikely to infringe.
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:0.35pt">Id.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt">, at 66. And
</span><a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt"> acknowledges that federal registration of “</span><a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt">”
would not prevent competitors from using the word “booking” to describe their own services.
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:0.35pt">Id.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:0.35pt">, at 55.”<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span>So, those against <.+ generic term> TLDs are going to have to find some other basis to argue that there will be some sort of harm. This leaves the opponents with (1) being against them because they didn’t apply
but their competitors did; (2) they are a registrar that can’t make any money on them; (3) a bias against free speech; (4) a bias against nascent trademarks. None of these are nearly as noble sounding as the fear about competitive harm, but Ginsburg has nicely
dispatched that fear. Sure would be nice if the Co-chairs would allow more time, as initially promised, so that we can develop some policy. This decision by SCOTUS is very instructive and we should take the time to understand it and build guardrails around
the <.+ generic term> TLDs instead of just throwing our hands up and sending nothing the Board instead of the something they asked us for.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span>Best,<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span>Paul<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"> Justine Chew <<a href="mailto:justine.chew@gmail.com" target="_blank">justine.chew@gmail.com</a>>
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, July 1, 2020 8:51 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> McGrady, Paul D. <<a href="mailto:PMcGrady@taftlaw.com" target="_blank">PMcGrady@taftlaw.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Aikman-Scalese, Anne <<a href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com" target="_blank">AAikman@lrrc.com</a>>; <a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Client Alert - Supreme Court Finds <a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank">BOOKING.COM</a> Non-Generic And Capable Of Federal Trademark Registration<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div><p class="MsoNormal">Hi Paul,<br>
<br>
The link you offered is one behind a paywall, so not very useful for me as a non-subscriber.<br>
<br>
But I note that Winterfeldt IP Group has also released a client advisory which points to uncertainty and important element(s) not raised in the appeal and therefore not considered by SCOTUS.<br clear="all">
<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><br>
Kind regards,<br>
<br>
Justine<br>
---<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal">On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 10:51, McGrady, Paul D. <<a href="mailto:PMcGrady@taftlaw.com" target="_blank">PMcGrady@taftlaw.com</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0in 0in 0in 6pt;margin:5pt 0in 5pt 4.8pt">
<div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><span>Thanks Anne.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span>All, here is the link to the actual decision:
</span><a href="https://www.law360.com/dockets/download/5efb47347da17405e86713cb?doc_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.supremecourt.gov%2Fopinions%2F19pdf%2F19-46_8n59.pdf&label=Opinion" target="_blank">https://www.law360.com/dockets/download/5efb47347da17405e86713cb?doc_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.supremecourt.gov%2Fopinions%2F19pdf%2F19-46_8n59.pdf&label=Opinion</a><span>.
The Supreme Court strikes down the USPTO’s per se rule against allowing trademark registration for generic term + trademark. Justice Ginsburg does a great job of pointing out why people who are worried about a competitor no longer being able to use the generic
word (e.g. claims that there would be a monopoly on such a term) have nothing to fear. It’s a great read. I wish we could get her on one of our calls!</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span>The same is, of course, true in ICANNland – a so-called closed generic for .hammers would not stop anyone from using “hammers” to identify hammers. And,
just like the for the USPTO, a per se rule against them makes no sense. This is, no doubt, why the ICANN Board deferred the 2012 closed generic applications to the upcoming round and asked us to develop policy to deal with those deferred applications. I
remain hopeful, against all nay saying to the contrary, that we can still eek out some policy here as the Board asked us to do.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span>Best to all,</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span>Paul</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><p><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(151,153,155)">To receive regular COVID-19 updates from Taft, </span><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(162,40,49)"><a href="https://www.taftlaw.com/general/subscribe" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(162,40,49)">subscribe
here</span></a></span><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(151,153,155)">. For additional resources, visit Taft's COVID-19
</span><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(162,40,49)"><a href="https://www.taftlaw.com/general/coronavirus-covid-19-resource-toolkit" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(162,40,49)">Resource Toolkit</span></a></span><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(151,153,155)">.</span><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(151,153,155)"><br>
<br>
This message may contain information that is attorney-client privileged, attorney work product or otherwise confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, use and disclosure of this message are prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please
notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments.</span><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(129,109,92)"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0in 0in"><p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Gnso-newgtld-wg <<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Aikman-Scalese, Anne<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 30, 2020 7:12 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [Gnso-newgtld-wg] FW: Client Alert - Supreme Court Finds <a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank">
BOOKING.COM</a> Non-Generic And Capable Of Federal Trademark Registration<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div><p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(153,51,102)">Dear WG members,</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(153,51,102)">Just in case anyone on the list is wondering about the US Supreme Court decision in the
<a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank">booking.com</a> trademark case that Paul and I were discussing on the list, please see attached summary. Again, my view is this is a “secondary meaning” case with uncontested evidence that consumers recognized the
domain as a source indicator of the owner’s services.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(153,51,102)"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(153,51,102)">Thank you,</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(153,51,102)">Anne</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(153,51,102)"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="border-collapse:collapse">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(175,39,47)">Anne E. Aikman-Scalese</span></b><u></u><u></u></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(50,50,50)">Of Counsel</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(50,50,50)">520.629.4428 office</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(153,51,102)"><a href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com" title="Email User" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(50,50,50)">AAikman@lrrc.com</span></a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(50,50,50)">_____________________________</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(153,51,102)"><span id="gmail-m_4044689763077087920cid:1730d77e09a4cff311"><image001.png></span></span><u></u><u></u></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(50,50,50)">Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(50,50,50)">One South Church Avenue, Suite 2000</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(50,50,50)">Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(153,51,102)"><a href="http://lrrc.com/" title="Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie Webpage" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(50,50,50)">lrrc.com</span></a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt"></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(153,51,102)"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(153,51,102)"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(153,51,102)"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center">
<hr size="3" width="100%" align="center">
</div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:gray"><br>
This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message
or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying
to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.
</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div><p class="MsoNormal">_______________________________________________<br>
Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>)
and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style
delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.<u></u><u></u></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<font face="Arial" color="Gray" size="1"><br>
</font>
</div>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg</a><br>_______________________________________________<br>By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.</div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>_______________________________________________<br>
Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.</blockquote></div></div>