[gnso-rpm-wg] Mp3, Attendance & AC Chat for Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) in all gTLDs PDP Working Group

J. Scott Evans jsevans at adobe.com
Thu Dec 22 15:14:33 UTC 2016

I agree

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 22, 2016, at 7:34 AM, Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com<mailto:kathy at kathykleiman.com>> wrote:

Fair suggestion and perfectly timed. We closed the meeting yesterday by agreeing to move the time of the fourth meeting each month to an Asia-Pacific friendly time. Mary Wong will be posting the details, but we all understood that we need to rotate the calls to all time zones.

Looking forward to your joining the call, Jonathan!

Best and Happy Holidays,


On 12/22/2016 2:52 AM, Paul at law.es<mailto:Paul at law.es> ZIMBRA wrote:
Fair suggestion IMHO

Paul Keating

On 22 Dec 2016, at 5:20 AM, Jonathan Agmon <jonathan.agmon at ip-law.legal<mailto:jonathan.agmon at ip-law.legal>> wrote:

Dear Michelle and Marry,

First I apologize for cc¡¯ing the entire list to this email but I think it is only fair that this would not be a private request.

The attendance list is a bit of a sore spot for me since I joined this WG. As I noted before I do want to attend the calls but all the calls are outside the time zone for the Far East. They are always at 1am or 6am for Singapore/Beijing time. For Australia I think it is even worse. It is therefore unreasonable for those of us in this part of the world to join. It is also a bit odd for us to continuously apologize for not making the calls. After all there is nothing to apologize for.

Can I therefore please ask you to add another category to the attendance. I suggest we call it ¡°out of time zone¡± or something to this effect.

You can place my name there and perhaps others from this part of the planet who so request. I hope this will better reflect the fact that I (and perhaps others) would like to join the calls but we cannot.

I appreciate your kind consideration of this request.



Jonathan Agmon (ºúº«É­)

Advocate, Director

Attorney and Counsellor at Law (admitted in New York)

jonathan.agmon at ip-law.legal<mailto:jonathan.agmon at ip-law.legal>


T SG +65 6532 2577

T US +1 212 999 6180

T IL +972 9 950 7000

F IL +972 9 950 5500

Soroker Agmon Nordman Pte Ltd.

133 New Bridge Road, #13-02, 059413 SINGAPORE

8 Hahoshlim Street P.O. Box 12425 4672408 Herzliya, ISRAEL

This message is confidential. It may also be privileged or otherwise protected by work product immunity or other legal rules. If you have received it by mistake, please let us know by e-mail reply and delete it from your system; you may not copy this message or disclose its contents to anyone. Please send us by fax any message containing deadlines as incoming e-mails are not screened for response deadlines. The integrity and security of this message cannot be guaranteed on the Internet.

From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Michelle DeSmyter
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2016 11:30 AM
To: gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>
Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>
Subject: [gnso-rpm-wg] Mp3, Attendance & AC Chat for Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) in all gTLDs PDP Working Group

Dear All,

Please find the attendance of the call attached to this email and the MP3 recording below for the Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) in all gTLDs PDP Working Group call held on Wednesday, 21 December 2016 at 22:00 UTC. Attendance of the call is posted on agenda wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/BJ3DAw


The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page:http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar[gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DgMFAg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=8_WhWIPqsLT6TmF1Zmyci866vcPSFO4VShFqESGe_5iHWGlBLwwwehFBfjrsjWv9&m=_STPpuvWbrg8yQQ2JMc3Sjjz6MxqKujdkmRIaJjBRsk&s=00U1t8R-APnrMH9L5X2fY5guBRLY8t8aDSeS04DpFw8&e=>

** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **

Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/

Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/BJ3DAw

Thank you.

Kind regards,

Michelle DeSmyter

Adobe Connect chat transcript for 21 December 2016:
Michelle DeSmyter:Welcome to the Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) in all gTLDs PDP Working Group call on Wednesday, 21 December 2016 at 22:00 UTC for 60 minutes.
  Michelle DeSmyter:Agenda page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_BJ3DAw&d=DgIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=8_WhWIPqsLT6TmF1Zmyci866vcPSFO4VShFqESGe_5iHWGlBLwwwehFBfjrsjWv9&m=1p-wLHOV5DCxALcMKIaTstgQyEINmRDoebHBQWYQJis&s=tm_s085ENNViOg929RdiG7gkLNsaJkDEosaPXVTs8p4&e=
  Philip Corwin:Hi Michelle. I am uncharacteristically early ;-)
  Michelle DeSmyter:No worries - glad to have you! :)
  Michelle DeSmyter:Welcome Maxim!
  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Hello Michelle, Philip
  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):will type instead of using mic - it is 1AM
  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):for me
  Michelle DeSmyter:Ouch - sounds good Maxim
  George Kirikos:Hi folks.
  Paul Tattersfield:Hi Everyeone
  Steve Levy:HI all. Happy holidays!
  Mary Wong:@Phil, we have the redlined version ready. Let us know if you want us to change to it.
  Mary Wong:We are at the bottom of page 5, for those who have just joined
  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):reasonably priced to allow for protection of small local businesses?
  George Kirikos:Accessible = affordable?
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I think affordable is too limiting
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:There may be other hinderances at play
  Heather Forrest:Agree with Kristine that affordable is too narrow a term
  Jeff Neuman:ease of use?
  Griffin Barnett:Agree that "access" would potentially include cost, as well as some of the things Phil mentioned such as language, etc.
  George Kirikos:I think the TMCH is translated into more than 10 languages, see top right of  https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.trademark-2Dclearinghouse.com_&d=DgIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=8_WhWIPqsLT6TmF1Zmyci866vcPSFO4VShFqESGe_5iHWGlBLwwwehFBfjrsjWv9&m=1p-wLHOV5DCxALcMKIaTstgQyEINmRDoebHBQWYQJis&s=qXnmVBiWu8fOKCHdoFLOa_tzbqLGG9qgUPIY3modHxY&e=
  Kurt Pritz:I think guidance for this question comes from the last prepositional clause: "in developing countries."
  Paul Tattersfield:Can we change ¡®trademark owners¡¯ to ¡®rights holders¡¯? Because it¡¯s important to provide guidance for marks protected by statue and treaty as well as trademarks.
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:The dictionary says accessible means: capable of being used, influenced, seen, understood, appreciated.  I think that word is fine.
  Heather Forrest:usable?
  susan payne:Agree with Paul's replacement to rights holders
  Griffin Barnett:Agree we should keep to "accessible"
  Kurt Pritz:Maybe revese the sentence: Can those in developing countries readily access trademark clearinghouse services (as compared to other regions)?
  Kathy Kleiman:Why would we change trademark owners to rights holders?
  Griffin Barnett:No objection to "rights holders"
  Paul Tattersfield:to include 6ter marks Kathy
  Mary Wong:On 4.1, note the Sub Team suggestion to share the WG findings on this with the New gTLD SubPro WG.
  Steve Levy:I like the term "confidential"
  Petter Rindforth:confidential seems better describe what we mean
  susan payne:I think we all understand closed = confidential
  Laurie Anderson:Closed seems to be misleading to the general public
  Kathy Kleiman:Tx Paul
  Jeff Neuman:Competition affects cost; bringing the costs down could increase use and effectiveness
  George Kirikos:5.1 is about costs. One alternative to multiple providers is to have regular competitive tenders.
  Steve Levy:Although I think TMCH competition is rather impractical, I feel it shoudl be opened up as a matter of principle
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:If that's the case, then I suggest that costs will come out of our investigation as an issue.  I'm sure we'll get data on that.  And if cost is a problem, then I think competition is a valid solution.
  Jeff Neuman:I offer no opinion on the question of who should address :)
  Jeff Neuman:I will only offer the opinion that this group has the relevant expertise to understand the TMCH and the implications of having multiple providers.  Looking at the membership of this PDP WG we have a lot of trademark owners and users of the TMCH. So to me it makes sense to be here.
  Steve Levy:Hasn't Deloitte actually lost money on its TMCH operation?
  Heather Forrest:Is CCT looking into this issue?
  susan payne:Hi, I would point out that the WG suggested 2 alternative options for language on this
  Mary Wong:Several WG members have expressed a preference for Option 2.
  Jon Nevett:@Steve -- we alone paid them about $1M -- can't believe that they have lost $
  susan payne:ICANN paid them too!
  George Kirikos:Hollywood accounting? :-)
  susan payne:old hand
  Griffin Barnett:I would support a further revised version of Cat 5 Q 1: ¡°Taking into consideration cost, reliability, global reach, diversity of services, consistency, and other possible factors, would it be desirable and practical to have more than one provider for the TMCH services? Why or why not?¡±
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Proposal 2 focuses on the question:
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Proposal 2 focuses on the question: "what is the problem" rather than suggesting a list....
  susan payne:I prefer 2
  Steve Levy:I also voted for Proposal 2
  susan payne:aha, for reasons Kristine is giving
  Heather Forrest:I prefer the open-endedness of 2
  Kurt Pritz:I prefer 1 as it delineates issues
  Petter Rindforth:I support Griffins suggested version
  Griffin Barnett:Proposal 2 wording seems to presuppose that there are concerns with a single provider of TMCH services, that's my only concern about that formulation
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Griffin, people from the community came up with this question, so it's safe to assume SOMEONE thinks there's a problem.  :)
  Vinzenz Heussler:Griffin Barnett combined 1 and 2 rather clever
  Heather Forrest:Mary has her hand up
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I'm not following that - visual learner.  Can someone capture Phil's most recent suggestion in writing?
  Kathy Kleiman:I like Phil's compromise wording
  Kurt Pritz:@ Mary - we are perilously close to agreement - cmonsensus
  Vinzenz Heussler:it's in the agenda/notes on the right side, isn't it
  Kurt Pritz:@ Mary "consensus"
  Griffin Barnett:Fine with the latest compromise wording
  David McAuley (RySG):Sometimes hard for notes on right to keep up with speedy speakers
  Paul Tattersfield:Does the current single operator nature of the TMCH optimize operational considerations as cost, reliability, global reach, and service diversity and consistency, or should significant changes be considered?
  Griffin Barnett:@Kurt -- I thought "cmonsensus" was intentionally clever
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Proposal 4 was Phil's right?
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I support that.
  Mary Wong:Proposal 3 was from Griffin, Proposal 4 is Phil's suggestion
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:thanks Mary, Santa better be kind to you...
  Laurie Anderson:Supporting Proposal 4
  Lillian Fosteris:I like Proposal 4
  Griffin Barnett:Agree you can remove "Why or why not" from my proposal -- it is implied by the initial question
  Mary Wong:I count 14 in favor of Proposal 4
  Heather Forrest:Are we not taking this out to other members of the WG? I misunderstood perhaps - thought the straw poll was going out to the list?
  Mary Wong:@Heather, we will send out a note highlighting that this is the proposed final set of TMCH Charter questions
  Vinzenz Heussler:costs proportionate to benefits?
  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):have we seen a single review of TMCH activities from financial perspective?
  David McAuley (RySG):it sounds like proportionate among those three
  David McAuley (RySG):icann, rights holders, and community
  George Kirikos:Should list more stakeholders, e.g. registries, registrars, registrants, etc.
  Chris Thomas:proportional?
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:+1 George
  Lillian Fosteris:+1 Georege
  Lillian Fosteris:George*
  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):+1 George
  susan payne:Agree George but I think that;'s intended by community
  David McAuley (RySG):I agree then with the idea of listing registries, registrars, registrant
  Heather Forrest:Should we split the question into multiple parts to encourage a reply on each stakeholder?
  Paul Tattersfield:Support
  George Kirikos:If they're part of "community", then they might get diluted by 1/3rd.
  David McAuley (RySG):registrants are part of conmunity as well
  Mary Wong:We got it, Phil
  George Kirikos:e.g. TM owners weighted equally as registrars, equally as registries, equally as registrants, is not the same as "TM Owners equal with registries PLUS registrars PLUS registrants".
  David McAuley (RySG):then I suggest we specify registries, rars, registrants
  David McAuley (RySG):maybe "fairly balanced" instead of proportionate - not sure what proportionate means
  David McAuley (RySG):i have no audio this evening - glitch going on here, sorry
  Paul Tattersfield:@David I think it was proportionate between costs and benefits
  David McAuley (RySG):by audio I meant mic
  David McAuley (RySG):ok thanks Paul
  susan payne:+1Kristine
  George Kirikos:@DavidM: might want to use the telephone connection (it's more reliable).
  David McAuley (RySG):like it Phil but use among instead of between
  Heather Forrest:rather than name them and perhaps miss someone, can we say 'all of the relevant stakeholders'?
  George Kirikos:That new alternative language looks fine to me.
  David McAuley (RySG):sorry Goerge - one with a higher power (at home now) has phone right now and i forgot cell in office
  David McAuley (RySG):George, that is
  Paul Tattersfield:Very much agree Susan
  David McAuley (RySG):Thanks Susan, that makes sense ¨C I was not part of subteam and do not have that history on this and so appreciate the point you make
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Yes.  I would say registries get the least benefit from having to use the TMCH, but is the cost to us proportionate to what the rights holders are getting?
  David McAuley (RySG):sounds good
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I like reasonably proportionate.
  Mary Wong:Are we talking about costs and benefits, or advantages and disadvantages?
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I think they're understood to be the same.
  Paul Tattersfield:the original question was benefits and costs
  Kathy Kleiman:+1
  Mary Wong:OK, thanks
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I hear a chorus of angels.
  David McAuley (RySG):i can hear it too - quite nice
  Mary Wong:Will do, Phil.
  susan payne:hurrah!!!
  Kathy Kleiman:Congratulations All!
  George Kirikos:1/2 the docs = questions
  David McAuley (RySG):sing seasonal songs?
  Kathy Kleiman:Happy Holidays to All!
  Petter Rindforth:We are the best!!
  George Kirikos:So it's really only 2 pages or so.
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I vote that we bail.
  George Kirikos:Happy holidays, folks. See you in 2017.
  David McAuley (RySG):agreed Phil, makes sense
  Kiran Malancharuvil:Thanks!
  Griffin Barnett:Happy to reserve this until next time
  susan payne:happy. it's 10.50 here the week before xmas
  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):could we use doodle poll?
  Mary Wong:04:00 UTC = 20:00/ PT, 23:00/ET, 04:00 London, 05:00 CET, 15:00 Sydney, 12:00 Beijing
  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:the registries
  Heather Forrest:Thanks very much for keeping the time within decent hours for APAC
  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):with RySG .. now it is not a conflict
  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):nice ... it is going to be 7.am instead of 1am :)
  George Kirikos:04:00 UTC on Thursday? (so that we are still on Wednesday night in Toronto/New York)
  susan payne:well I understand and support the reason for doing so - but I won't be on a call at 4am.  Id love to see some calls that work foir aspac, ME and europe but are less good for US
  George Kirikos:Or is it 04:00 UTC on Wednesday? (meaning that we are instead on Tuesday in North America???)
  Heather Forrest:To Susan's point, it does seem that Europe and APAC are normally the time compromisers. That said, most participants are in North America, but maybe this is a chicken-egg problem
  Mary Wong:@Heather, yes - so one way we are trying to accommodate all of this is to do this as one rotation out of four
  Heather Forrest:@ Mary, that sounds practical
  Paul Tattersfield:Question to Staff: Would it be possible to make the document window wider and move the Agenda/Notes window down making it the same height as the chat window? As this would make it easier to read wider/table formatted documents without having to horizontal scroll so often
  George Kirikos:We should decide the date, too (Wednesday vs. Thursday UTC, i.e Tuesday vs. Wednesday in North America), on the list.
  Mary Wong:@Paul, I will ask - but I believe it is fixed
  Paul Tattersfield:thanks Mary
  George Kirikos:Bye everyone. Great work in 2016....looking forward to 2017.
  Michelle DeSmyter:January 4th
  Steve Levy:Have a great holiday and New Years everyone!
  David McAuley (RySG):Thanks all, best wishes
  Michelle DeSmyter:17:00 UTC
  Mary Wong:Happy holidays everyone! Thank you for your time!
  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Happy Holidays!
  Heather Forrest:All the best for 2017 everyone
  Vinzenz Heussler:happy holidays everyone!
  Paul Tattersfield:Bye Everyone - Happy Holidays and best for  a successful 2017
  Monica Mitchell:thank you everyone.
  Laurie Anderson:All the best in 2017
  susan payne:bye

This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses.
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>

gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>

gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20161222/22a64f1c/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the gnso-rpm-wg mailing list