[Gnso-rpm-trademark] Action Item/Links & Agenda: RPM Trademark Claims Sub Team Meeting 02 Jan 1700 UTC

Wed Dec 19 20:04:51 UTC 2018

Dear RPM Trademark Claims Sub Team members,

Please see below the draft agenda for the meeting on Wednesday, 02 January at 1700 UTC for 60 minutes.

Please also see the following action item, references, and links from the meeting notes below.

Best,

Mary, Ariel, Berry, and Julie

ACTION ITEM: By 1300 UTC, Wednesday, 02 January 2018, analyze whether / how the data in "Actual & Potential Registrants", “Registry & Registrars”, and “Trademark Owners” tabs 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 and add your comments/suggestions in the summary table (to be provided, see action item 1) [BY 02 Jan]  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?

Draft Agenda:

1. Review agenda/Statements of Interest

2. Select Sub Team Leader

3. Continue survey analysis

4. AOB

NOTES & ACTION ITEMS

Actions:

Staff will extend the nominations for Sub Team leaders/co-leaders to COB 21 December and also send to the Working Group for reference. [DONE]
For consistency with the Sunrise Sub Team: Staff will create Google documents for each question to which Sub Team members can add comments/suggestions. [ONGOING]
Sub Team members: By 1300 UTC, Wednesday, 02 January 2018, analyze whether / how the data in "Actual & Potential Registrants", “Registry & Registrars”, and “Trademark Owners” tabs 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 and add your comments/suggestions in the summary table (to be provided, see action item 1) [BY 02 Jan]  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. Review agenda/Statements of Interest: Susan Payne has taken the position of Secretary of the Intellectual Property Constituency.

2. Select Sub Team Leader

-- Griffin Barnett and Kristine Dorrain were nominated but were unable to accept.

-- Martin Silva Valent has volunteered to be a Co-Chair.

-- Keep the nomination time period open until COB Friday, 21 December.  Revisit as of 02 January. Forward to full WG.

3. Begin survey analysis:

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?

-- E12 and F12 answer whether they are receiving, but not on the deterring bad-faith registrations.

-- Seems inconclusive on data bad-faith registration, but some evidence that it is causing people to think.

-- Comes down to where the trademark and brand owner data come from.

-- One respondent did say that he analyzed claims against trademark data.

-- Look at the tab Registrant Q11 (in the data) -- shows a lot of people stopping to consider.

-- Seems to be deterrence but we don't know who is being deterred.

-- The Claim is supposed to have people pause and consider, that is the intended effect.

-- Could say (cautiously) that there is some deterrence of registrations.

-- Responses E and F 23 -- people are responding that they were confused/intimidated (15).

-- We don't have to have a firm recommendation for every question -- we could say probably some users are deterred.  

-- Form was a little formal/legal and stiffly worded.  Careful on what we infer.

-- From staff: Can the group agree that the results show that the Claims Notice does affect the decision whether or not to proceed with a registration; and that various reasons were cited by respondents for not proceeding?

-- Agree that the wording of the notice is causing confusion so we can recommend improving the wording of the notice to decrease confusion and improve future results.

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

-- Other tabs that may apply: e.g. Registry Q26, cells B8-B13 (higher costs); Registry Q29 - claims/sunrise should be optional; Registrar Q4i (decrease in costs by eliminating claims); Registrar - Q10 - decrease in costs; Registrar - Q11 (costs again); Also stuff in the TM owner tabs, e.g. F52, comment that TMCH should be public, and not just notice via claims.

-- Goal is to answer the refined charter questions.

-- Staff had matched questions to help bring some organization. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-trademark/attachments/20181219/2f6075fd/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2057 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-trademark/attachments/20181219/2f6075fd/smime.p7s>