[gnso-rpm-wg] Mp3, Attendance & AC Chat for Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) in all gTLDs PDP Working Group
Mike
mike at whois.com.au
Thu Dec 22 20:46:56 UTC 2016
Hi All,
I'd like to +1 the comments about (Australia) time zones and meetings.
I'd also like to make it clear that I have made numerous attempts since
September to have issue(s) raised specific to the TMCH process
/procedure / rules / history without success..
Regards.
Mike Russell
Whois®
https://www.whois.com.au
On 22/12/2016 2:50 PM, Jonathan Agmon 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.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Jonathan Agmon (胡韩森)
>
> Advocate, Director
>
> Attorney and Counsellor at Law (admitted in New York)
>
> jonathan.agmon at ip-law.legal <mailto:jonathan.agmon at ip-law.legal>
>
> www.ip-law.legal <http://www.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] *On
> Behalf Of *Michelle DeSmyter
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 22, 2016 11:30 AM
> *To:* gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
> *Cc:* 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
>
> *MP3:*http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-rpm-review-21dec16-en.mp3
>
> 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 – 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
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
>
More information about the gnso-rpm-wg
mailing list