[Gnso-rpm-protection] Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team

Fri Jul 21 14:00:44 UTC 2017

Hi Jon,

Please don’t take my comment as any sort of veiled accusation against Donuts DPML.  It was absolutely not intended in that way and I apologize for not setting out my views in more detail.

My point is simply that I feel our WG should err on the side of having full information on marketplace RPMs to fulfill its charter of evaluating all RPMs in general (formal, marketplace, and otherwise).  The WG can then use this information to discuss whether it feels that all marketplace RPMs should be held to some minimum standards to balance the protection of both brand owners and good-faith registrants. In that event, I have no doubt that Donuts’ services would more than meet such standards.

Regards,
Steve

From: Jon Nevett <jon at donuts.email<mailto:jon at donuts.email>>
Date: Friday, July 21, 2017 at 9:06 AM
To: "Steven M. Levy, Esq." <slevy at accentlawgroup.com<mailto:slevy at accentlawgroup.com>>
Cc: Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org<mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>>, "gnso-rpm-protection at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection at icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-protection] Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team

I disagree with Steve here.

This information would help the WG evaluate whether private RPMs are, in any cases, at risk of operating improperly (for example, in an arbitrary, overbearing, or unreliable manner).

Again, this group is not evaluating private RPMs and whether they are operating properly or improperly.  This is an information gathering exercise to educate the WG -- we are not looking at whether a particular service is considered by a WG member to be "arbitrary, overbearing or unreliable" -- whatever that means. This type of review is outside of our charter.

Jon

On Jul 20, 2017, at 6:16 PM, Steve Levy <slevy at accentlawgroup.com<mailto:slevy at accentlawgroup.com>> wrote:

Thank you, Mary.

I have one comment and one question:

- I believe Question 7 should not be deleted.  I feel it will be helpful to the WG’s overall understanding of RPMs to know whether a given marketplace RPM has been subject to approval review and, if so, the criteria used in such evaluation. This information would help the WG evaluate whether private RPMs are, in any cases, at risk of operating improperly (for example, in an arbitrary, overbearing, or unreliable manner).

- Do group members believe that Question 4 encompasses such information as the scope of each marketplace RPM and the fees charged for such services?  If not, should this be added as a separate question?  I feel this information is also important to our understanding of the marketplace RPM landscape.

I look forward to speaking with everyone tomorrow.

Regards,
Steve

<Accent Law Logo NEW Very Small.png>
Steven M. Levy, Esq.
Accent Law Group, Inc.
301 Fulton St.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19147
United States
Phone: +1-215-327-9094
Email: slevy at AccentLawGroup.com<mailto:slevy at accentlawgroup.com>
Website: www.AccentLawGroup.com<http://www.accentlawgroup.com/>
<http://www.accentlawgroup.com/>LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/stevelevy43a/<http://www.linkedin.com/in/stevelevy43a/>

From: <gnso-rpm-protection-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org<mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>>
Date: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 at 12:49 PM
To: "gnso-rpm-protection at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection at icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-protection] Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team

Hello members of the Additional Marketplate RPM Sub Team,

This note is intended just to draw your attention to the need to review and discuss the “reverse redline” document concerning the scope of our work, as well as to complete the Action Items from our first call. The message below contains a link to the “reverse redline” document for your review. If you can, please send your comments to this mailing list before our call this Friday.

Additionally, since no one else has been nominated or has come forward to seek a co-chair position on this Sub Team, staff will follow up with the Working Group co-chairs to confirm that Paul McGrady is the sole chair of this Sub Team.

Thanks and cheers
Mary

From: Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org<mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>>
Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 15:07
To: "gnso-rpm-protection at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection at icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection at icann.org>>
Subject: Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team

Dear all,

Following consultation with Paul McGrady, the interim chair for this RPM Sub Team, staff is pleased to confirm the next call for the Sub Team as well as to request, on Paul’s behalf, that Sub Team members provide input and responses to the action items noted below before Friday 21 July 2017.

  1.  Next Sub Team meeting
The next Sub Team call is being planned for next Friday, 21 July 2017, at 1600 UTC for one hour. Please look out for the calendar invitation and call details in your Inbox shortly.

  1.  Action items/topics for mailing list discussion before the next call
Please be so kind as to take time before next Friday to do the following:

  *   Review the action items from our first call (from 14 June): https://community.icann.org/x/UU3wAw
  *   Review the “reverse redline” prepared by staff at the Sub Team’s request, showing all the proposed deletions, comments and suggestions made – with a view toward providing your feedback on the proposed deletions, suggested edits, and questions noted in the Comment Boxes in the document before next Friday: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66080081/Additional%20Marketplace%20RPM%20Questions%20-%2015%20June%202017.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1497555225000&api=v2

Finally, we note that the Sub Team had agreed to keep open the call for volunteers for co-chair for this team at the last call. As it has been several weeks since that call, please make sure that you nominate anyone who may wish to serve alongside Paul as co-chair of the Sub Team by the end of this week. If no other co-chair is named, staff will proceed to confirm Paul’s position as Sub Team chair with the Working Group co-chairs.

Thanks and cheers

Mary

_______________________________________________
Gnso-rpm-protection mailing list
Gnso-rpm-protection at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-rpm-protection at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-protection

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-protection/attachments/20170721/d7e93882/attachment-0001.html>