[gnso-rpm-wg] FOR REVIEW & DISCUSSION: Provider and Survey Responses on TM-PDDRP

David Tait david.tait at icann.org
Fri Oct 14 14:06:11 UTC 2016

Dear Jeff


Further to your previous email I am pleased to attach a consolidated version of the responses received.


Kind regards,



From: Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>
Date: Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 11:09
To: Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org>, "gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org" <gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>
Subject: RE: [gnso-rpm-wg] FOR REVIEW & DISCUSSION: Provider and Survey Responses on TM-PDDRP


Thanks Mary for this.  Is there a way to combine all of the written responses in the summary document as well especially to questions 6, 7, 8, 10.


Jeffrey J. Neuman

Senior Vice President |Valideus USA | Com Laude USA

1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600

Mclean, VA 22102, United States

E: jeff.neuman at valideus.com or jeff.neuman at comlaude.com 

T: +1.703.635.7514

M: +1.202.549.5079




From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2016 3:49 PM
To: gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
Subject: [gnso-rpm-wg] FOR REVIEW & DISCUSSION: Provider and Survey Responses on TM-PDDRP


Dear all,


You will recall that the Working Group had agreed to resume deliberations over the Trademark Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure (TM-PDDRP) after receipt of responses from the TM-PDDRP providers and closure of the Community Survey. 


We received responses from two providers – FORUM and WIPO, for which we thank Brian Beckham, Ty Gray, Daniel Legerski and their colleagues. We also collected sixteen community member responses to the TM-PDDRP Community Survey, including from registrars and intellectual property rights-holders. All the responses, as well as an aggregated data report on the Community Survey, have now been uploaded to the Working Group wiki space here: https://community.icann.org/x/ugqsAw[community.icann.org]. 


The Working Group co-chairs have asked that Working Group members review these responses in time for our next call on 19 October 2016, where, if time permits, we will start discussing them. At the moment, we anticipate that a fuller review, including community participation, will be the focus of the Working Group’s open meeting at ICANN57 in Hyderabad. This will allow us to complete this initial review of the TM-PDDRP shortly thereafter.


FYI the tentative date and time of the open Working Group meeting at ICANN57 is currently Monday 7 November (Day 5 of the meeting), from 11.00-12.30 local Hyderabad time. As with all these sessions, remote participation facilities will be made available for those who will not be present in Hyderabad.


Thanks and cheers




Mary Wong

Senior Policy Director

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

Email: mary.wong at icann.org

Telephone: +1-603-5744889



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20161014/18e16676/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Consolidated GNSO RPM WG Survey.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 96857 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20161014/18e16676/ConsolidatedGNSORPMWGSurvey-0001.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4715 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20161014/18e16676/smime-0001.p7s>

More information about the gnso-rpm-wg mailing list