<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Century Schoolbook";
panose-1:2 4 6 4 5 5 5 2 3 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
color:#993366;}
p.CM11, li.CM11, div.CM11
{mso-style-name:CM11;
mso-style-priority:99;
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
line-height:13.3pt;
text-autospace:none;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Century Schoolbook",serif;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#993366">Paul,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#993366">Your reference to the booking.com ruling as something that “shreds the notion that generic terms somehow cause competitive harm” is surprising to me.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#993366"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#993366">The US Supreme Court Ruling concluded, based on evidence below, that booking.com was NOT generic. It’s a secondary meaning case in which the evidence below clearly demonstrated that the consuming public associates
the booking.com site with a SINGLE SOURCE indicator of certain services and related reputation in the marketplace. In so holding, the court rejected the USPTO practice of always denying registration to a generic term in combination with .com. Putting aside
the question of having US law on secondary meaning govern ICANN policy, I don’t quite understand why you maintain that a generic TLD with multiple second level domain registrations could somehow become a “single source” indicator of quality and service. In
other words, booking.com is a particular source of booking services that provides certain guarantees, payment policies, reputation for quality etc. on which consumers rely.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#993366"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#993366">Since you make references to a “pre-trademark”, you seem to be saying that a closed generic TLD could eventually operate as a trademark for a “single source” indicator after acquiring secondary meaning in the
marketplace, even though the registry would be selling multiple second level domain name registrations to thousands of different business sources of goods and services. Could you please elaborate on your reasoning? Is this about full quality control by the
Registry of goods and services being offered under a particular Closed Generic TLD and is that the basis of your argument for the Public Interest being served?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#993366"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#993366">For those who may not have time to read the full decision, I have tried to pull out the “nut” of the basis for the holding in the text pasted below. It’s definitely a secondary meaning case and the ruling was
that booking.com is NOT generic but is rather a source-indicating trademark via acquired distinctiveness. The Supreme Court affirmed the 4th Circuit and the lower federal district court findings in this regard. The text describing those findings is pasted
below.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#993366"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#993366">Anne<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#993366"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="CM11" style="text-align:justify;text-indent:11.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">“Relying in significant part on Booking.com’s new evidence of consumer perception, the District Court concluded that “Booking.com”—unlike “booking”—is
not generic. The “consuming public,” the court found, “primarily understands that BOOKING.COM does not refer to a genus, rather it is descriptive of services involving ‘booking’ available at that domain name.”
<i>Book-ing.com B.V. </i>v. <i>Matal</i>, 278 F. Supp. 3d 891, 918 (2017). Having determined that “Booking.com” is descriptive, the District Court additionally found that the term has acquired secondary meaning as to hotel-reservation services. For those
services, the District Court therefore concluded, Booking.com’s marks meet the distinctiveness requirement for registration.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">The PTO appealed only the District Court’s determination that “Booking.com” is not generic. Finding no error in the District Court’s assessment of how consumers perceived the term “Booking.com,”
the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the court of first instance’s judgment. In so ruling, the appeals court rejected the PTO’s contention that the combination of “.com” with a generic term like “booking” “is
<i>necessarily </i>generic.” 915 F. 3d 171, 184 (2019).”</span><span style="color:#993366"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#993366"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#993366"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#993366"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>McGrady, Paul D.<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, July 8, 2020 6:31 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> alexander@schubert.berlin; gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Client Alert - Supreme Court Finds BOOKING.COM Non-Generic And Capable Of Federal Trademark Registration<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">[EXTERNAL]</span></strong><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center">
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Thanks Alexander. I am not making that argument and so won’t address your variant of an argument I’m not making.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">The point of the booking.com decision is that it shreds the arguments that <. + generic term> TLDs will somehow cause a competitive harm. Shreds.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Paul<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Gnso-newgtld-wg <<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org">gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Alexander Schubert<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, July 2, 2020 10:48 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Client Alert - Supreme Court Finds BOOKING.COM Non-Generic And Capable Of Federal Trademark Registration<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Paul,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I don’t understand: Are you arguing that because Booking.com won the right to deny third parties using the letter combination “booking.com” in connotation with
hotel booking services an applicant for a generic string based gTLD could deny public access to the new gTLD namespace?
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><br>
Question:<br>
In your opinion; if the domain registration for booking.com would expire, could Booking.com deny the new registrant from offering hotel booking services on a website to which the domain routes – based on their “booking.com” TM (once they have it)?<br>
<br>
Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Alexander<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Gnso-newgtld-wg [<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org">mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>McGrady, Paul D.<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Donnerstag, 2. Juli 2020 18:13<br>
<b>To:</b> Justine Chew <<a href="mailto:justine.chew@gmail.com">justine.chew@gmail.com</a>>; Rubens Kuhl <<a href="mailto:rubensk@nic.br">rubensk@nic.br</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Client Alert - Supreme Court Finds BOOKING.COM Non-Generic And Capable Of Federal Trademark Registration<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Thanks Justine. Understood. And to be clear, SCOTUS doesn’t address our exact debate (although we are mentioned in the one-man dissent but in that dissent Justice Breyer specifically mentions how new gTLD registries
are building brand awareness for their brands, e.g. .club – so again helpful to those who believe <.+generic term> TLDs should remain available as they were in the AGB2012 Guidebook), it just dispatched the fear-of-not-being-able-to-use-the-term argument upon
which the <anti-.+ generic term> have built their case and generally takes a big swing at per se rules. Lucky timing, since it gives this WG another chance to actually make Policy as the Board asked us to do rather than just saying “we don’t know.”
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">I understand why those whose position is essentially vitiated by this SCOTUS decision want to push hard to get the topic removed from discussion now that this case it out. Even so, hopefully the Co-chairs will
give this the time it was promised.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Paul<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Justine Chew <</span><a href="mailto:justine.chew@gmail.com"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">justine.chew@gmail.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">>
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, July 1, 2020 11:44 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Rubens Kuhl <</span><a href="mailto:rubensk@nic.br"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">rubensk@nic.br</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">>; McGrady, Paul D. <</span><a href="mailto:PMcGrady@taftlaw.com"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">PMcGrady@taftlaw.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">><br>
<b>Cc:</b> </span><a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Client Alert - Supreme Court Finds BOOKING.COM Non-Generic And Capable Of Federal Trademark Registration<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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">
<o:p></o:p></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>
---<o:p></o:p></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"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Thu, 2 Jul 2020 at 11:53, Rubens Kuhl <<a href="mailto:rubensk@nic.br">rubensk@nic.br</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Is there a position on generic trademarks in general from WIPO ? <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Rubens<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 2 Jul 2020, at 00:05, Justine Chew <<a href="mailto:justine.chew@gmail.com" target="_blank">justine.chew@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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">
<o:p></o:p></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>
---<o:p></o:p></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"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Thu, 2 Jul 2020 at 10:49, McGrady, Paul D. <<a href="mailto:PMcGrady@taftlaw.com" target="_blank">PMcGrady@taftlaw.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">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. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The Justice writes:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-right:.05in;margin-left:.05in;text-align:justify;text-indent:.1in;line-height:13.2pt;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.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:.25pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.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:.25pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.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:.25pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.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:.25pt">ebooking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.25pt">”
or “</span><a href="http://hotel-booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.25pt">hotel-booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.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:.25pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.25pt">” as a mark, but to undue control over similar language,
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:.25pt">i.e.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.25pt">, “booking,” that others should remain free to use.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-right:.05in;margin-left:.05in;text-align:justify;text-indent:.1in;line-height:13.2pt;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.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:.3pt">id.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.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:.3pt">Ibid. </span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.3pt">Similarly, “[i]n a ‘crowded’ field of look-alike marks” (</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:.3pt">e.g.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.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:.3pt">Id.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.3pt">, §11:85. And even where some consumer confusion exists, the doctrine known as classic fair use, see
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:.3pt">id.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.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:.3pt">KP Permanent Make-Up</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.3pt">,
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:.3pt">Inc. </span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.3pt">v.
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:.3pt">Lasting Impression I</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.3pt">,
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:.3pt">Inc.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.3pt">, 543 U. S. 111, 122–123 (2004).</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-right:.05in;margin-left:.05in;text-align:justify;text-indent:.1in;line-height:13.2pt;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.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:.35pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.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:.35pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.35pt"> concedes that “</span><a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.35pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.35pt">”
would be a “weak” mark. Tr. of Oral Arg. 66. See also </span><i><span style="letter-spacing:.35pt">id.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.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:.35pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.35pt"> recognizes, making it “harder . . . to show a likelihood of confusion.”
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:.35pt">Id.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.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:.35pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.35pt"> accepts that close variations are unlikely to infringe.
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:.35pt">Id.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.35pt">, at 66. And
</span><a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.35pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.35pt"> acknowledges that federal registration of “</span><a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.35pt">Booking.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.35pt">”
would not prevent competitors from using the word “booking” to describe their own services.
</span><i><span style="letter-spacing:.35pt">Id.</span></i><span style="font-size:11.5pt;letter-spacing:.35pt">, at 55.”</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Best,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Paul<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Justine Chew <</span><a href="mailto:justine.chew@gmail.com" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">justine.chew@gmail.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">>
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, July 1, 2020 8:51 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> McGrady, Paul D. <</span><a href="mailto:PMcGrady@taftlaw.com" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">PMcGrady@taftlaw.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Aikman-Scalese, Anne <</span><a href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">AAikman@lrrc.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">>;
</span><a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Client Alert - Supreme Court Finds </span><a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">BOOKING.COM</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
Non-Generic And Capable Of Federal Trademark Registration</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">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">
<o:p></o:p></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" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><br>
Kind regards,<br>
<br>
Justine<br>
---<o:p></o:p></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" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 10:51, McGrady, Paul D. <<a href="mailto:PMcGrady@taftlaw.com" target="_blank">PMcGrady@taftlaw.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Thanks Anne.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">All, here is the link to the actual decision:
<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>. 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!<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Best to all,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Paul<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#97999B">To receive regular COVID-19 updates from Taft, </span><a href="https://www.taftlaw.com/general/subscribe" target="_blank"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#A22831">subscribe here</span></a><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#97999B">.
For additional resources, visit Taft's COVID-19 </span><a href="https://www.taftlaw.com/general/coronavirus-covid-19-resource-toolkit" target="_blank"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#A22831">Resource Toolkit</span></a><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#97999B">.</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#97999B"><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><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><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<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#993366">Dear WG members,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#993366">Just in case anyone on the list is wondering about the US Supreme Court decision in the
</span><a href="http://booking.com/" target="_blank">booking.com</a><span style="color:#993366"> 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><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#993366"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#993366">Thank you,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#993366">Anne</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#993366"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" 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 0in 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#AF272F">Anne E. Aikman-Scalese</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#323232">Of Counsel</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#323232">520.629.4428 office</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><a href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com" target="_blank" title="Email User"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#323232">AAikman@lrrc.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#323232">_____________________________</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#993366"><image001.png></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#323232">Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#323232">One South Church Avenue, Suite 2000</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#323232">Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><a href="http://lrrc.com/" target="_blank" title="Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie Webpage"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#323232">lrrc.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="336" valign="top" style="width:3.5in;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#993366"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#993366"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#993366"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center">
<hr size="3" width="100%" align="center">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><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><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">_______________________________________________<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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<br>
<hr>
<font face="Arial" color="Gray" size="1"><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.
<br>
</font>
</body>
</html>