[Gnso-rpm-practitioner] Help fill out the practitioners spreadsheet

Tue Feb 27 05:12:13 UTC 2018

Thanks, Kathy.

600-650 is done.
Of the cases searched, 32% listed complainant counsel's name.

Sincerely,
Jay Chapman

* <http://www.digimedia.com>*
102 S. Broadway, #200 - Edmond, OK 73034
jay at digimedia.com - (940) 691-1800

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 5:25 PM, Scott Austin <SAustin at vlplawgroup.com>
wrote:

> Kathy:
>
> I complete my portion of your list assignment (rows 1270-1320) and
> inserted counsel for complainant based on review of the cases listed, but
> most do not name the specific practitioner, only the firm, and none listed
> a counsel for respondent, unless the placekeepers listed in the case file
> as *«cFirstName» «cMiddle» «cLastName» *for respondent’s representative
> were more than placekeepers and signaled characters that did not
> transliterate. Also agree with Georges N. that there are many more
> practitioners than those listed, as well as the URS panelists themselves
> who if they are so inclined may have some general observations to share on
> procedural or other challenges faced given the short amount of time and
> resources available to decide each expedited summary proceeding.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> *Please click below to  use my booking calendar to schedule:*
>
> *  a 15-minute call <http://calendly.com/saustin-2/15min>   * a 30-minute
> call <http://calendly.com/saustin-2/30min>    a 60-minute call
> <http://calendly.com/saustin-2/60min>
>
>
>
> *[image: IntellectualPropertyLaw 100]    **[image: microbadge[1]]*
> <http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/33308-fl-scott-austin-1261914.html>
>
> Scott R. Austin | Board Certified Intellectual Property Attorney | VLP Law
> Group LLP
>
> 101 NE Third Avenue, Suite 1500, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
>
> Phone: (954) 204-3744 | Fax: (954) 320-0233 | SAustin at VLPLawGroup.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Gnso-rpm-practitioner [mailto:gnso-rpm-practitioner-
> bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Kathy Kleiman
> *Sent:* Sunday, February 25, 2018 10:24 AM
> *To:* gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org
> *Subject:* [Gnso-rpm-practitioner] Help fill out the practitioners
> spreadsheet
>
>
>
> Hi Jason and All,
>
> There seems to be a misunderstanding, and that's OK. I thought that Staff
> would be uploading the Practitioners spreadsheet that I started to allow
> everyone to help continue the work. I did not see that below, so I have
> uploaded the spreadsheet and opened it up. *Could you help fill in the
> Practitioners?  I did the first 100 or so, but I am willing to bet that the
> Practitioners at the start of the URS may be only a small set of those who
> have been practicing in URS proceedings more recently. *
>
> Could you help with filling in the spreadsheet?  A half hour or so of
> everyone's time before this Wednesday's meeting (members and staff) should
> give us some great insight!
>
> To avoid overlaps, I've put in names below. No obligation -- just a space
> in the spreadsheet should you want to. Link below. Some guidance for quick
> & easy searches at the top of the spreadsheet. You should have full edit
> privileges!
>
>
> *Link:
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15VBgK2XRQRWkKONiJiLhSHpBYwf0nSGbvckeJrECeBU/edit?usp=sharing
> <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15VBgK2XRQRWkKONiJiLhSHpBYwf0nSGbvckeJrECeBU/edit?usp=sharing>
> *
> (Based on spreadsheet line numbers - far left)
> 200-250 - Collin  Kurre
> 300-250 - Georges Nahitchevansky
> 400-450 - Gerald Levine
> 500-550 - Jason Schaeffer
> 600-650 - Jay Chapman
> 700-750 - Petter Rindforth
> 800-1269  - Kathy Kleiman (it's mostly one case)
> 1270- 1320 - Scott Austin
> 1370- 1420 - Zhou Heng
> 1470- 1520 - Julie Hedlund
> 1570- 1620 Michelle DeSmyte
>
> Many thanks!!
> Best, Kathy
>
> On 2/22/2018 9:17 AM, Julie Hedlund wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> Please note that the links to the two Google docs have been updated to
> facilitate editing.  We apologize for any inconvenience caused by the
> previous links.
>
>
>
> *Action Items (with updated links):*
>
> 1. Staff will prepare a Google spreadsheet of the list of practitioners –
> *done*, see: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1czGq3Y5Z1bVx1ys_MnfLkFE1
> S-_Dwc3kRzfrTprlNFE/edit?usp=sharing
>
> 2. Staff will prepare a Google doc with the questions and arrange them in
> buckets – *done*, see: https://docs.google.com/spread
> sheets/d/1xtoDMVGgvLw6TTDrXarVg2gj2xgR6pm_R6FilPu5qgc/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Julie
>
>
>
> *From: *Gnso-rpm-practitioner <gnso-rpm-practitioner-bounces at icann.org>
> <gnso-rpm-practitioner-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund
> <julie.hedlund at icann.org> <julie.hedlund at icann.org>
> *Date: *Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 6:06 PM
> *To: *"gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org" <gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org>
> <gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org> <gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Gnso-rpm-practitioner] Action & Notes: RPM Sub Team for
> URS Practitioners call on Wednesday, 21 February 2018 18:00 UTC
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> Per the actions below please see the links to the requested Google
> documents.  These documents are open to editing and Sub Team members are
> encouraged to suggest edits directly in the text.  For example, staff
> welcomes additional suggestions for practitioners, as well as contacts and
> contact information.  With respect to the questions, staff welcomes edits
> to the questions and topic areas, as well as additional suggested
> questions,
>
>
>
> *Action Items:*
>
> 1. Staff will prepare a Google spreadsheet of the list of practitioners –
> *done*, see: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xtoDMVGgvLw6TTDrXarV
> g2gj2xgR6pm_R6FilPu5qgc/edit?usp=sharing
>
> 2. Staff will prepare a Google doc with the questions and arrange them in
> buckets – *done*, see: https://docs.google.com/docume
> nt/d/1czGq3Y5Z1bVx1ys_MnfLkFE1S-_Dwc3kRzfrTprlNFE/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
>
> Thank you very much for your assistance and please let us know if you have
> any questions.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Julie
>
>
>
> *From: *Gnso-rpm-practitioner <gnso-rpm-practitioner-bounces at icann.org>
> <gnso-rpm-practitioner-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund
> <julie.hedlund at icann.org> <julie.hedlund at icann.org>
> *Date: *Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 2:59 PM
> *To: *"gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org" <gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org>
> <gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org> <gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org>
> *Subject: *[Gnso-rpm-practitioner] Action & Notes: RPM Sub Team for URS
> Practitioners call on Wednesday, 21 February 2018 18:00 UTC
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> Below are the action items and notes staff captured from the RPM Sub Team
> for URS Practitioners meeting today (21 February 2018).  The notes from the
> call are posted to the Sub Team wiki space, together with the call
> recording, transcript and Adobe Connect chat and attendance records.
>
>
>
> Note also that the next call will be on *Friday, 28 February at 1800 UTC.*
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Julie
>
> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
>
>
>
> *Action Items:*
>
>
>
> 1. Staff will prepare a Google spreadsheet of the list of practitioners.
>
> 2. Staff will prepare a Google doc with the questions and arrange them in
> buckets.
>
>
>
> *Notes:*
>
>
>
> 1.  Overview of scope of work and selection of Sub Team chair(s) (if
> desired): Jason Schaeffer volunteered to Chair.
>
>
>
> Scope of Work
>
> -- Look to the expertise of this group on identifying practitioners.
>
> -- Brainstorm on scope and nature of concerns to help drive the questions.
>
>
>
> 2.  Discussion:
>
>
>
> a) Identify a list of experienced URS practitioners:
>
>
>
> -- Looking to identify a set of experienced URS practitioners.
>
> -- Wondering if we should include on the agenda how we do the outreach to
> these practitioners?  What do we ask them?
>
> -- Start filling in a spreadsheet of practitioners.
>
> -- Start with who we know now and add to it, from URS cases.
>
> -- Think it is important to think on the practitioner side -- there are a
> lot of people who practice in this space, but others who have decided not
> to do URS, but use UDRP instead.  Get insight from people who practice in
> online enforcement and find out why they don't use the URS.
>
>
>
> List of Practitioners: David Taylor, John Berryhill, Richard Biagi... URS
> attorneys, yoyo.email
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https://yoyo.email&c=E,1,xumqx9T7CfJevQtRK9S8ljtq033qYpF5dg5UIGnX54nQqJD8ttZxVImxgKRfb5pNKaxv4XDvhMnM4zp04yIwIa8vFms7V9DaS4VTqqymUSaztfT8&typo=1>
> of Dunstable, International, GB.; Doug Eisenberg, David Bernstein, Flip
> Petillon, Zak Muscovitch, CSC Digital Brand Services of Wilmington, DE
> (representative to TM owners), Mark Monitor, Stobbs Julius E Stobbs of
> Cambridge  (does a lot of the Virgin work), David E. Weslow of Washington,
> DC, China Trademark Association to help identify practitioners.
>
>
>
> b) Develop a list of questions directed at these practitioners:
>
>
>
> Organization: Seems that we will have procedural issues, substantive
> issues and practical issues (filing mechanics, word limitations, etc>)
> Should we break up our work into different buckets?  The third bucket could
> be tactics and approaches or something similar, to cover questions to both
> URS and non-URS practitioners, eg those that chose alternate methods —
> UDRP, litigation, etc
>
>
>
> Questions:
>
> -- Do they use TMCH or a printout from active web sites.  Why they use one
> for evidence of use over the other one, for establishing the claim.
>
> -- .SMD file -- is it a good basis for proof of use of the mark?  If not,
> what would they recommend?
>
> -- Threshold question: whether or not a practitioner is choosing to use
> the URS and if not why are they bypassing the URS?
>
> -- If they are bringing a claim are they happy with the process?  Is the
> process clear?  Any procedural problems?
>
> -- Notice: Are practitioners finding that the notice is getting through to
> the registrant and which one is getting through?  Hard copy, email, etc.?
>
> -- How do the practitioners feel about the ability to refile after 6
> months, appeal process?  The extended mechanisms.
>
> -- Questions on the burden of proof and the remedies available.
>
> -- The appeal process -- what do they think about it?  Its use by domain
> name holders? What can we do to make it better?  May be very few cases that
> have appealed, is it being used?
>
> -- Fees: Ask about whether the fee is too high or too low?  Whether or not
> the fee structure works for the URS and does it factor into a brand
> protector whether or not to file.
>
> -- Response fee for multiple filing.
>
> -- What do they think about the suspension for the duration of the
> registration?  Whether to have an extended time of the suspension.  The
> suspension may also apply to the decision whether or not to use the URS as
> a protection mechanism.
>
> -- The way that the brand owner and practitioners -- how do they know
> about the URS?
>
> -- How do registrants know about the responses to the URS and the
> affirmative defenses?  Question about URS awareness generally and how it is
> disseminated to brand owners and others, and the effectiveness of that.
>
> -- How do the practitioners feel about the expertise of the examiners and
> the fairness of the decisions.  Whether or not the practitioners are
> satisfied with the examiners and the fairness of their decisions.  Also
> gets to the issue of training of examiners.
>
> -- Whether or not there should be something analogous for the URS that
> gives more certainty to the structure.  Should we have a analogous WIPO's
> reviews.
>
> -- Apart from looking at remedies and effectiveness -- look at the burden
> of proof, is it clear, does it need to be modified?  Bad faith, and/or
> discussion.
>
> -- Should there be more guidance regarding what meets the "clear and
> convincing" standard?  This might get into training for providers, for the
> larger group.
>
> -- Other thought regards WHOIS issues  (inaccuracy of such) and how that
> impacts -- particularly with the GPDR
>
>
>
> 3.  Next steps/next meeting:
>
>
>
> -- Next steps:  Staff to produce Google docs and circulate.
>
> -- Next meeting: 28 February at 1800 UTC.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Gnso-rpm-practitioner mailing list
>
> Gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org
>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-practitioner
>
>
>
>
> This message contains information which may be confidential and legally
> privileged. Unless you are the addressee, you may not use, copy or disclose
> to anyone this message or any information contained in the message. If you
> have received this message in error, please send me an email and delete
> this message. Any tax advice provided by VLP is for your use only and
> cannot be used to avoid tax penalties or for promotional or marketing
> purposes.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-rpm-practitioner mailing list
> Gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-practitioner
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-practitioner/attachments/20180226/ac0baa75/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 11048 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-practitioner/attachments/20180226/ac0baa75/image001-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1121 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-practitioner/attachments/20180226/ac0baa75/image002-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1901 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-practitioner/attachments/20180226/ac0baa75/image003-0001.jpg>