<div dir="ltr">Yes, I would like to keep Q4 together. Below I've tweaked a bit in response to Kristine's comments, as I understood them.<div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Rebecca Tushnet<div>Georgetown Law</div><div>703 593 6759</div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 7:47 PM, Rebecca Tushnet <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Rebecca.Tushnet@law.georgetown.edu" target="_blank">Rebecca.Tushnet@law.georgetown.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">I think breaking this up is likely to make it harder to assess the current system versus the proposed system. I think that Kristine's basic questions could be aggregated at the end, though I have a couple of notes, which are below my slightly revised version:<div><br></div><div><span class=""><p class="MsoNormal">Should the matching criteria for Claims be expanded?<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">i. If
so, how (what criteria) and why? <span></span></p>
</span><p class="MsoNormal">a. What is the evidence of harm under the existing system?<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">b. What unintended consequences might non-exact matches
have?<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">c. What is the feasibility of expanded matches? E.g, if human input is required, who would be
responsible for that input? Who would
pay for it? How would it affect the overall
costs of the RPM system, and should users be allowed to choose whether to use (and pay for) expanded matches? If automated matches are used, how will the
automated procedure be developed, at what costs/timeline? <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">ii. If so,
should the Claims notice change?<span></span></p>
<p class="m_4618435299721857398gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst">a.<span style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span>If so, how?<span></span></p>
<p class="m_4618435299721857398gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpLast">b.<span style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span>Should there be more than one type of Claims
notice?</p></div></div></blockquote><div>iii. If so, should the Claims period differ for exact and non-exact matches?</div><div>a. Is there evidence of different behavior with respect to exact and non-exact matches over time?</div><div>b. What effects would having more than one Claims period have on different stakeholder groups?</div><div>iv. If so, what entity should implement the non-exact matching? </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><p class="m_4618435299721857398gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpLast"><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Questions for Kristine: In terms of claims period duration, could you say a little
more about why expanding the match criteria would interact with the claims
period?<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In terms of implementation criteria, could you say more
about what you mean by “implementation”?
Given what we’ve seen with design marks—where even if there is no
consensus about what to do, what has been revealed is that the provider (here
Deloitte) ended up making significant choices that have major effects on what
may be included; I would not like to see that repeated, if only to spare future
groups similar battles.<span></span></p></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="m_4618435299721857398gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Rebecca Tushnet<div>Georgetown Law</div><div><a href="tel:(703)%20593-6759" value="+17035936759" target="_blank">703 593 6759</a></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div class="h5">On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 7:10 PM, Dorrain, Kristine via Gnso-rpm-trademark <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-trademark@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-trademark@icann.org</a>></span> wrote:<br></div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div class="h5">
<div bgcolor="white" lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="m_4618435299721857398m_5813610730864587434WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1f497d">Hi team:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1f497d">In the hopes that we can wrap up our calls this Friday and report on our work to the plenary group next week, I’d like to kick off our final action item, assigned to us a week ago by the plenary
WG – that is, to include in the Charter questions and workplan, a discussion of the Shatan/Winterfeldt/Graham proposals (“S/W/G proposal”).
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1f497d">For anyone out of pocket, I apologize for the long email with colors and formatting.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1f497d">The proposed language from the chat, submitted by Kathy, is:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt">In light of the evidence of the TM Claims gathered in Questions 1-3 above, how extensive is the need for non-exact matches? What is the proof of harm under the existing system? What unintended consequences
might non-exact matches have? What is the appropriate balance going forward? a. If non-exact matches are not adopted, then no further action is necessary. b. If non-exact matches of some form are adopted, should the marks in the TMCH be used to generate non-exact
matches for the purpose of providing a broader range of claims notices? If so, how should the claims notices be written?<u></u><u></u></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">As I started to think about this in the context of the other charter questions, I started to think about the way we had the charter questions structured and how this would fit.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">New Q1 is gating: What’s working, what’s not.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">New Q2 brings up all the current proposed “solutions.”<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">New Q3 asks about the wording of the claims notice.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Putting all of the S/W/G proposal factors into a single new question meant we’d be duplicating effort. So, I decided to take a risk. We’ve finalized our charter questions. But in order to really fit them
in the proper place, I’m suggesting to work the S/W/G proposal questions in, as below.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">That keeps Q1 as gating: intended/unintended effects.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">That makes sure we keep all the proposals in Q2.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">That makes sure we discuss the variations in language (Q3) for the notice at the same time.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">And the newly-revised Q4 adds time to discuss how it could work technologically.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Thoughts on my straw proposal below?
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;background:yellow">Do you support the “working in” option or the creation of a single, multi-part standalone question?</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">(I just extracted the Updated questions for the purposes of this discussion…we are NOT eliminating any columns)
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:red">My changes are in red text.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<table class="m_4618435299721857398m_5813610730864587434MsoNormalTable" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="border-collapse:collapse">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" style="border:solid black 1.0pt;background:#d9d9d9;padding:5.0pt 5.0pt 5.0pt 5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black">Updated Question</span></b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" style="border:solid black 1.0pt;border-top:none;padding:5.0pt 5.0pt 5.0pt 5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">1.</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black">Is the Trademark Claims service having its intended effect, specifically:</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:0in;text-indent:0in;vertical-align:baseline">
<u></u><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"><span>a.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:black">Is the Trademark Claims service having its intended effect of deterring bad-faith registrations
</span>and providing notice to potential registrants?<span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:0in;text-indent:0in;vertical-align:baseline">
<u></u><span style="color:black"><span>b.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:black">Is the Trademark Claims service having any unintended consequences, such as deterring good-faith registrations?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" style="border:solid black 1.0pt;border-top:none;padding:5.0pt 5.0pt 5.0pt 5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">2. If the answers to 1.a. is “no” or 1.b. is “yes”, or if it could be better: What about the Trademark Claims service should be adjusted, added or eliminated in order for it to have its intended effect?</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:0in;text-indent:0in;vertical-align:baseline">
<u></u><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"><span>a.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:black">Should the Claims period be extended - if so, how long (up to permanently)?</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:0in;text-indent:0in;vertical-align:baseline">
<u></u><span style="color:black"><span>b.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:black">Should the Claims period be shortened?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:0in;text-indent:0in;vertical-align:baseline">
<u></u><span style="color:black"><span>c.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:black">Should the Claims period be mandatory?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:0in;text-indent:0in;vertical-align:baseline">
<u></u><span style="color:black"><span>d.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:black">Should any TLDs be exempt from the Claims RPM and if so, which ones and why?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:0in;text-indent:0in;vertical-align:baseline">
<u></u><span style="color:black"><span>e.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:red">Should the matching criteria for Claims be expanded?</span><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_4618435299721857398m_5813610730864587434MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:baseline">
<u></u><span style="color:black"><span>i.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:red">If so, how (what criteria) and why?</span><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_4618435299721857398m_5813610730864587434MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:baseline">
<u></u><span style="color:black"><span>ii.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:red">If so, should the expansion affect the duration of the Claims period?</span><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" style="border:solid black 1.0pt;border-top:none;padding:5.0pt 5.0pt 5.0pt 5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">3.</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black">Does the Trademark Claims Notice to users meet its intended purpose?</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_4618435299721857398m_5813610730864587434MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:baseline">
<u></u><span style="color:black"><span>a.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:black">If not, is it intimidating, hard to understand, or otherwise inadequate?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_4618435299721857398m_5813610730864587434MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:baseline">
<u></u><span style="color:black"><span><span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> <wbr>
</span>i.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:black">If inadequate, how can it be improved?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_4618435299721857398m_5813610730864587434MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:baseline">
<u></u><span style="color:black"><span>b.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:black">Does it inform potential registrants of the scope and limitations of trademark holders’ rights?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_4618435299721857398m_5813610730864587434MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:baseline">
<u></u><span style="color:black"><span><span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> <wbr>
</span>i.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:black">If not, how can it be improved?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_4618435299721857398m_5813610730864587434MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:baseline">
<u></u><span style="color:black"><span>c.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:black">Are translations of the Trademark Claims Notice effective in informing potential registrants of the scope and limitation of trademark holders’ rights?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_4618435299721857398m_5813610730864587434MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:baseline">
<u></u><span style="color:red"><span>d.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:red">If the matching criteria should be expanded, should the Claims Notice change? If so, how?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_4618435299721857398m_5813610730864587434MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:baseline">
<u></u><span style="color:black"><span><span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> <wbr>
</span>i.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:red">Should there be more than one Claims Notice?</span><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" style="border:solid black 1.0pt;border-top:none;padding:5.0pt 5.0pt 5.0pt 5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">4. If the Review of all RPMs in all gTLDs PDP determines
</span><s><span style="color:red">that non-exact matches of trademarks should be allowed inclusion in the TMCH</span></s><span style="color:black">,
</span><s><span style="color:red">should the TM Claims Notice be changed, and if so, how?
</span></s><span style="color:red"> to expand matching criteria for Claims Notices, what implementation criteria does the WG recommend?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red">a. Ask the TMCH?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red">b. Find a 3P provider?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red">c. Something else?</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" style="border:solid black 1.0pt;border-top:none;padding:5.0pt 5.0pt 5.0pt 5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">5. Should the Trademark Claims period continue to be uniform for all types of gTLDs in subsequent rounds?</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">For proposed data, <span style="color:red">
I suggest that we ensure any UDRP/URS data gathering we initiate include a question looking for evidence to support or refute the assertion that UDRP and URS cases demonstrate significant abuse of non-exact match terms and when those terms are registered, relative
to the launch of the TLD.<u></u><u></u></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Thanks,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Kristine<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-trademark-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-trademark-bounces@ica<wbr>nn.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-trademark-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-trademark-bou<wbr>nces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Amr Elsadr<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, June 12, 2017 4:13 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-trademark@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-trademark@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [Gnso-rpm-trademark] Action Items for the Trademark Claims Sub Team Call - 9 June 2017<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Dear Trademark Claims Sub Team Members,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Below are the action items from the Sub Team Call on 9 June. The action items, notes, meeting document and materials as well as recordings and transcripts have been posted to the meeting’s wiki page here:
<a href="https://community.icann.org/x/mzzwAw" target="_blank">https://community.icann.org/x/<wbr>mzzwAw</a>.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Thanks.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Amr<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Action Items:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:22.5pt">
<u></u><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><span>1.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Sub Team</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> to draft a question(s) that would allow the WG to analyze the proposals by Michael Graham, Greg Shatan and Brian Winterfeldt during the Trademark
Claims Review<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:22.5pt">
<u></u><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><span>2.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Sub Team</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> to use the following question as a starting point for discussion of the proposals on non-exact matches by Michael Graham, Greg Shatan and Brian
Winterfeldt: <i>"In light of the evidence of the TM Claims gathered in Questions 1-3 above, how extensive is the need for non-exact matches? What is the proof of harm under the existing system? What unintended consequences might non-exact matches have? What
is the appropriate balance going forward? a. If non-exact matches are not adopted, then no further action is necessary. b. If non-exact matches of some form are adopted, should the marks in the TMCH be used to generate non-exact matches for the purpose of
providing a broader range of claims notices? If so, how should the claims notices be written?"</i>
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<br></div></div>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Gnso-rpm-trademark mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gnso-rpm-trademark@icann.org" target="_blank">Gnso-rpm-trademark@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-trademark" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/l<wbr>istinfo/gnso-rpm-trademark</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>