[Gnso-rpm-trademark] Actions & Notes: RPM Trademark Claims Sub Team Meeting 12 Dec 1700 UTC

[Julie Hedlund]

Dear All,

 

Please see below the action items and notes captured by staff from the RPM Trademark Claims Sub Team meeting held on 12 December 2018 (17:00-18:00 UTC).  Staff have posted to the wiki space the action items and notes.  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/2018-12-12+Sub+team+for+Trademark+Claims. 

 

See also the survey analysis tool: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1aBw-dW2gBzvBfhUgl3u6ShWlPZt0yyNF-Vs1qmUuIjg/edit#gid=381275905.

   

Best Regards,

Julie

Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

 

==

 

NOTES & ACTION ITEMS

 

Actions:
Staff to add original numbering to the agreed questions. (DONE)
Sub Team members to volunteer or nominate candidates for Sub Team leader. (ONGOING)
Sub Team members: By Wednesday, 19 December 2018, analyze whether / how the data in Rows 12-27 of the "Actual & Potential Registrants" tab answer the agreed question 1 and its sub questions (a) and (b), in the spreadsheet at: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1aBw-dW2gBzvBfhUgl3u6ShWlPZt0yyNF-Vs1qmUuIjg/edit#gid=381275905. (BY 19 DEC)  See:
 

Question 1 (Final Charter Questions for Trademark Claims)

Is the Trademark Claims service having its intended effect? Consider the following questions specifically in the context both of a Claims Notice as well as a Notice of Registered Name:

a) Is the Trademark Claims service having its intended effect of deterring bad-faith registrations and providing Claims Notice to domain name applicants?

b) Is the Trademark Claims service having any unintended consequences, such as deterring good-faith domain name applications?

 

Notes:

 

1. Statements of Interest: no updates. 

 

2. Select Sub Team Leader: 

 

-- Cynthia King nominated Griffin Barnett, who is considering the nomination.

-- Kristine Dorrain is considering whether to volunteer.

-- Griffin and Kristin may consider whether to offering to Co-Lead the Sub Team.

 

3. Introduction to the survey analysis tool: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1aBw-dW2gBzvBfhUgl3u6ShWlPZt0yyNF-Vs1qmUuIjg/edit#gid=381275905 

 

-- First tab (far left) is the content table.

-- First column is the consolidated data from the survey results.

 

Example: Actual & Potential Registrant Response:

-- Column A: Questions based on the refined charter questions.

-- Column B: Actual survey question (but without the logic).

-- Some questions are asked of both actual and potential registrants, and some are related.

-- Column C: Sub Team's draft question.

-- Column D: Actual registrant response.

-- Column E: Potential registrant response

-- Column F: Findings from Analysis Group.

-- Look at the table -- there are some dividers -- noting what relates to Trademark Claims and Sunrise.

 

Discussion:

-- The table ties back to the agreed charter questions.  Once the analysis is done there may be information here that may be relevant to other charter questions.

-- First, go through survey results.

-- Then how or whether the survey results answer the agreed questions.

-- How the survey results may answer other survey questions.

-- Goal is to answer the charter questions.  Don't get bogged down in analyzing the data.  Focus on column A and how we get the answers.

-- Question: What is in the tabs?  That is the raw data/detailed responses.

 

4. Begin survey analysis:

 

Second tab: Actual & Potential Registrants

Column A: (reading the questions)

 

Discussion:

-- Based on the results it seems pretty clear that only half of the people who were not actual registrants answered the question about the notice correctly.  Effectiveness and claims notice.

-- Note that some respondents seem to have been deterred (worried).

-- Claims notice: overarching question -- background question -- how much deterrence is acceptable?

-- #4/#5: That is what row 14 is answering.  Is the notice intimidating, not the service.

-- Look at the survey analysis group outside of ICANN -- the meaning what the notice, half of the answers the distractor answers (wrong/unhelpful).  Didn't understand the notice.

-- Proposal: Take question 1, sub parts a and b, study those questions, and compare against the 3 tabs.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-trademark/attachments/20181212/263278a7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4630 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-trademark/attachments/20181212/263278a7/smime.p7s>