[Gnso-rpm-trademark] Action Items and Notes from the Trademark Claims Sub Team - 21 April 2017

[Michael Graham (ELCA)]

Mary:

Thank you.  I think we should focus on the Google document, and appreciate that.

Michael R.

From: Mary Wong [mailto:mary.wong at icann.org]
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2017 2:06 AM
To: Michael Graham (ELCA) <migraham at expedia.com>
Cc: Amr Elsadr <amr.elsadr at icann.org>; gnso-rpm-trademark at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-trademark] Action Items and Notes from the Trademark Claims Sub Team - 21 April 2017

Hello Michael and everyone - we did not distribute an agenda as we assumed the group would just go through the updated google doc and try to finalize the batching and questions. We apologize if we should have sent out a notice and agenda accordungly.

We plan to have the google doc (exported as of the morning of our call) available for viewing and discussion in the adobe connect room. Please let us know if there's more you think we should have at hand. Thanks!

Cheers
Mary

Sent from a mobile phone, sorry for any errors and brevity.

On Apr 28, 2017, at 01:39, Michael Graham (ELCA) <migraham at expedia.com<mailto:migraham at expedia.com>> wrote:
Amr:

Was an agenda for the Friday call distributed? I also did not see the proposed revised Questions.

Michael R.

From: gnso-rpm-trademark-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-trademark-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rpm-trademark-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Amr Elsadr
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 12:49 PM
To: gnso-rpm-trademark at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-trademark at icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-rpm-trademark] Action Items and Notes from the Trademark Claims Sub Team - 21 April 2017

Hi,

Below are the Action Items and Notes from today's Trademark Claims Sub Team call.

Thanks.

Amr


ACTION ITEMS:


1.      Research required to address Question 5 - staff to prepare briefing based on findings in the Analysis Group revised report to assist in that endeavor

2.      Staff to move Question 4 to the overarching TMCH Charter questions

3.      Staff to merge (batch) Questions 3 and 5 + suggest possible rewording/refinement

4.      Staff to merge (batch) Questions 1 and 2 + suggest possible rewording/refinement - subsequent to answering Qs 3 and 5

5.      Proposed Question 6 will not be included, but will be taken into consideration when rewording questions 3 to 5

6.      Staff to provide policy context/references on the intent of Trademark Claims

7.      Staff and Chairs to work up proposed "strawperson" language for remaining questions (maybe in new column on Google Doc)

8.      Sub Team to identify additional needed data on top of what Analysis Group and CCT-RT have provided (need to look at those data as well)

9.      Updated Google Doc to be provided by staff to the Sub Team by Monday 24 April, group to complete homework by Wednesday 26 April

NOTES:


?         Combine Questions 1 and 2 (are these implementation questions? - what data is required to provide guidance?)

?         Combine Questions 3, 4 and 5

?         Question 3: Replace "genuine" with "good faith" - more accurate description

?         Suggestion to move Question 4 to overarching TMCH Charter Questions, move to Sunrise Sub Team, or keep in Trademark Claims - should it be reworded?

?         Suggestion to remove questions 3 and 4, and combine in 5

?         Additional question suggested already moved to the TMCH discussion - being debated on the full Working Group mailing list - TM Claims Sub Team should only consider this question if referred to it by the full Working Group

?         Suggestion to refine Question 5 to compare effect of Claims against the intended effect they are meant to have ("Is the Claims Service having the intended effect?")

?         Noteworthy to evaluate whether the Trademark Claims are or are not exceeding their intended effects - one available resource for data on this is the Analysis Group revised report

?         Should interdependencies between questions 1 and 2 and the answer to question 5 be considered? Possible to suggest answering batched questions 3, 4 and 5 before answering questions 1 and 2

?         Potential follow-up question to question 5: If the Claims service is not functioning as intended, how can the policy/service be amended to match function with intent - what recommendations are required to achieve this?
_______________________________________________
Gnso-rpm-trademark mailing list
Gnso-rpm-trademark at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-rpm-trademark at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-trademark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-trademark/attachments/20170428/5cb44857/attachment-0001.html>