[gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items, Slides and Notes from the Working Group call held earlier today

Mon Apr 10 15:11:03 UTC 2017

My question is who owns those domains and what trademark registration did they use to support. Sunrise registration?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 10, 2017, at 5:44 AM, George Kirikos <icann at leap.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi folks,
> 
>> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 2:34 AM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Of course, if we find that these were registered during Sunrise in any
>> percentage (high or low) that is absolutely NOT evidence of a problem.
>> Rather it's evidence that the Sunrise is working as intended, which is one
>> of the key questions this WG has to answer.  So that fact would be good to
>> know.
> 
> First, we started with the example of "THE", from the EFF letter
> (which originated from a blog post on the Mike Berkens blog at
> TheDomains.com.
> 
> Secondly, we saw the top 10 strings from the report by the Analysis
> Group that demonstrated that they were all common dictionary terms
> that should be available to anyone to register (without any priority
> in sunrise).
> 
> Thirdly, I dived deeply into one of those 10 strings, HOTEL, and
> demonstrated in detail how it was gamed. See point #6 in my March 12
> email at:
> 
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fpipermail%2Fgnso-rpm-wg%2F2017-March%2F001119.html&data=02%7C01%7C%7C9818f4ad0bd344c4ddb908d4800f464e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274250473983989&sdata=7azxtEhLnrhz7lRD5arU%2B3HLFRINeEKV00imju1JILo%3D&reserved=0
> 
> which showed the linkages, and even provided screenshots of the domain
> names being listed for sale after being harvested during the Sunrise
> periods. And, there was a "bonus" --- it demonstrated that the plural
> HOTELS was also gamed.
> 
> Then, some IPC members took this clear evidence of gaming and
> suggested that it was "domain speculators", trying to shift the blame
> away from the trademark holders. When domain names are misused, it's
> sometimes called cybersquatting and the "domain camp" is held
> responsible. In this case, it's *trademarks* that are being misused,
> in order to game the domain name process established for new gTLDs.
> It's the "trademarks camp" that is responsible, not domain name
> registrants (who had little say in designing the system that the
> trademark camp used to their advantage in an unbalanced manner).
> 
> While Greg and his camp might suggest that this is evidence that the
> TMCH is "working as intended", that's obviously not a credible
> argument.
> 
> I will now provide a fourth example, one that should raise some
> eyebrows amongst those who are neutral and are here to improve the
> system for everyone. Remember, when we joined this PDP, we were asked
> to set aside our personal interests and work to improve the system for
> the benefit of all, and not just be obstructionists preserving the
> status quo or advocates for a particular position regardless of the
> evidence.
> 
> Here it is: RICH! Yes, RICH. Was the TMCH designed to "protect" that
> string from abuse by the public, and give "priority" sunrise rights to
> its "TM owner"?
> 
> According to: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fie.godaddy.com%2Fhelp%2Fabout-casino-domain-names-16213&data=02%7C01%7C%7C9818f4ad0bd344c4ddb908d4800f464e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274250473983989&sdata=meC7eRC3IdceFa77IZMnGki7X0uft1RebdLCL8vOyOk%3D&reserved=0
> 
> the sunrise period for the .CASINO TLD opened on 3/24/15 at 16:00 UTC
> and closed on 5/23/15 at 16:00 UTC. Landrush didn't begin until May
> 27, 2015 at 16:00 UTC.
> 
> However, the WHOIS for Rich.casino shows it was created
> 2015-05-26T17:53:28Z (i.e. before the landrush started, and thus
> presumably in the sunrise period).
> 
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwhois.domaintools.com%2Frich.casino&data=02%7C01%7C%7C9818f4ad0bd344c4ddb908d4800f464e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274250473983989&sdata=0v8uqi9ShjG5lDXxMSXIoPXtzElQI8v2xTx8PD1wN5Q%3D&reserved=0
> 
> And as a bonus, I'll provide as fifth example, another one that should
> boggle the mind --- CREDIT! Take a look at the WHOIS for
> credit.casino:
> 
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwhois.domaintools.com%2Fcredit.casino&data=02%7C01%7C%7C9818f4ad0bd344c4ddb908d4800f464e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274250473983989&sdata=UzQ8I5u1a%2F60vULTz%2FaC6AKs7AqYh7Q7ML35MUjOAHo%3D&reserved=0
> 
> Creation Date: 2015-05-26T17:53:31Z indicating again that this was a
> sunrise registration, since it predated the landrush.
> 
> Mike Berkens had even more potential examples of gaming of commonly
> used dictionary terms on his blog at:
> 
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedomains.com%2F2015%2F05%2F28%2Ftrademark-game-playing-results-in-great-generic-domains-being-registered-in-casino-sunrise%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C9818f4ad0bd344c4ddb908d4800f464e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274250473983989&sdata=wl%2B7yGukqeyAHk6RMWWN69UFdf%2FaTmMMBo5%2FZ8e9w8Y%3D&reserved=0
> 
> Since some in this working group suggest that we need to gather more
> evidence, I propose that we open up a public comments period *NOW*,
> while our work is ongoing, to solicit examples of TMCH gaming
> behaviour from the public, and also to ask them directly whether the
> TM claims notices had a chilling effect. Since it is the pool of
> domain name registrants who were denied the ability to register these
> strings because they were already taken during the sunrise periods,
> they are in the best position to know exactly which questionable
> strings entered into the TMCH database with sunrise privileges.
> 
> So, let's do it --- let's get the *public* to CROWDSOURCE the data
> that some folks are demanding (but are insisting the TMCH database be
> kept secret, thus denying us the very data needed to uncover gaming).
> I am sure the public has a lot to say about this important issue, and
> it behooves us to gather that data now, and not pretend we can do an
> adequate review without that data and input. Crowdsourcing the data
> also shifts some of the "work" to the public, and reduces the burden
> on PDP working group members.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> George Kirikos
> 416-588-0269
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.leap.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C9818f4ad0bd344c4ddb908d4800f464e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274250473983989&sdata=EQdLT8Veyheo1CAmvQSQLqaIjJbfYq3uw7UBoDaoRxo%3D&reserved=0
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fgnso-rpm-wg&data=02%7C01%7C%7C9818f4ad0bd344c4ddb908d4800f464e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274250473983989&sdata=C0ozll%2FRmK7J5sBeh0maH5xHaxjUyN4ZnFD2ifRquSw%3D&reserved=0