[Gnso-rpm-sunrise] Actions & Notes: RPM Sunrise Sub Team Meeting 08 May 1800 UTC

[Julie Hedlund]

Dear All,

Please see below the action items and notes captured by staff from the RPM Sunrise Sub Team meeting held on 08 May 2019 (18:00-19:30 UTC).  Staff will post them to the wiki space.  Please note that these are high-level notes and are not meant as a substitute for the recording, chat room, or transcript. The recording, AC chat, transcript and attendance records are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/2019-05-08+Sub+Team+for+Sunrise+Data+Review.

Best Regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

==

NOTES & ACTION ITEMS

Action Items:


  1.  Sub Team members will review discussion threads on:
     *   Q1 (including Proposal #9): https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-sunrise/2019-April/000278.html
     *   Q3 (including Proposals #10 & #11): https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-sunrise/2019-April/000270.html
     *   Q4: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-sunrise/2019-April/000271.html
     *   Q5(a): https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-sunrise/2019-April/000279.html
     *   Q6: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-sunrise/2019-May/000286.html
  2.  Question #8: Staff will revise the summary table.  Distinguish among the three elements: LRP, ALP, QLP to make sure they are not conflated.
  3.  Staff will update the summary table based on the transcript/recording from the meeting.

Brief Notes:

1. Updates to Statements of Interest (SOIs): No updates provided.

2. Development of Preliminary Recommendations:

a. Discuss agreed Sunrise Charter Question 8

-- There were some limited comments in the data, but don’t think they relate to the LRP.  Some issues around launch programs generally.
-- Limited uptake of ALP.
-- People need to be clear what they are talking about.  Make sure this is clear in the discussion thread.
-- The responses said that some registries noted issues with the improved launch program, which is completely different.
-- Staff will revise the summary table by reviewing the source material.

b. Discuss agreed Sunrise Charter Question 9, in conjunction with Proposal #13

-- Support for keeping the current rules.
-- Let mark holders decide where to register the mark in Sunrise.
-- Anecdote suggest problems -- scenarios where people gamed the system.
-- Solution penalizes the vast majority of genuine brand owners.
-- Don’t develop a system that goes further than it should.
-- Not every TLD is category-specific.

Proposal #13, Michael Karanicolas:
-- Where a top level domain is suggestive of a category of service, then the TM holder would have to prove use in that category of service.
-- The proposal doesn’t go far enough.
-- Could look at how SDRP could address the problem or some variant.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-sunrise/attachments/20190508/58a409e1/attachment.html>