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

J. Scott Evans jsevans at adobe.com
Mon Apr 10 22:40:45 UTC 2017


George K:

Yeah. We’re reading the same list.

+1.



[ttps://inside.corp.adobe.com/content/dam/brandcenter/images/image002.gif]

J. Scott Evans

408.536.5336 (tel)

345 Park Avenue, Mail Stop W11-544

Director, Associate General Counsel

408.709.6162 (cell)

San Jose, CA, 95110, USA

Adobe. Make It an Experience.

jsevans at adobe.com

www.adobe.com








From: <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of "Nahitchevansky, Georges" <ghn at kilpatricktownsend.com>
Date: Monday, April 10, 2017 at 3:37 PM
To: George Kirikos <icann at leap.com>, "gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org" <gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items, Slides and Notes from the Working Group call held earlier today

So apparently you have an alleged anecdotal example of gaming the system by a speculator/domainer (your earlier evidence on .casino was incorrect as I noted in a prior email to you).  I note that the examples do not show a widespread practice of abuse by brand owners.  Indeed, the second example of What Box ultimately relates to, in part, 495 total domain names that have registered by that speculator outfit – a number of which are not single word domains but combinations of words.  If you track some of their registrations you will find that only a handful of domain names were registered in regards to any one of the common words you site to (for example, they registered 18 “ilove” new extension domains).  So again this is anecdotal and not proof that folks are registering trademarks to take all common words out of commission or to stifle free speech.  Look, there is always going to be some bad apples in any system you devise (e.g. trolls), but to then take this limited example and try lump all brand owners into the same mix to try and gut the TMCH sunrise provisions is really appalling.


I think the problem with the argument that is being posited is like saying that there must be abuse in family X because some humans around the world over the past year have committed bad acts, and we must investigate the mom dad and children of family X and see if abuse exists. And if you don't let us investigate everything -and go into their house and look at all their belongings and activities and bank accounts etc etc - then you are obviously hiding something and the abuse must exist in family X and be rampant.



From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of George Kirikos
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 5:18 PM
To: gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items, Slides and Notes from the Working Group call held earlier today

Some more examples of gaming of the TMCH sunrises, via public blog posts:
1. via Kevin Murphy of DomainIncite.com:

http://domainincite.com/16492-how-one-guy-games-new-gtld-sunrise-periods<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdomainincite.com%2F16492-how-one-guy-games-new-gtld-sunrise-periods&data=02%7C01%7C%7C25fcfecbc05849e8ef8908d48062449f%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274606948787033&sdata=oOsSMkJDyzEulLow3tmob3G0%2BAimPgCQM4eMUef1WU4%3D&reserved=0>
DIRECT, CLOUD, and SOCIAL
Note the comments below that blog post by John Berryhill, who wrote "…and the attorney who was unable to use her client’s US registration for “PHYSICS” with the inconvenient disclaimer, and who then obtained a late change in the TMCH rules allowing figurative registrations, so that her client could use a foreign logo registration to obtain the TMCH entry for that word… is she an IPC member, Kristina?"
implying that the common term "PHYSICS" might also be gamed, by an IPC member. And there are other comments by him and others on that page that are worth reading.
2. via Konstantinos Zournas of OnlineDomain.com:

http://onlinedomain.com/2014/04/15/legal/fake-trademarks-stealing-generic-domains-in-new-gtld-sunrises/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fonlinedomain.com%2F2014%2F04%2F15%2Flegal%2Ffake-trademarks-stealing-generic-domains-in-new-gtld-sunrises%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C25fcfecbc05849e8ef8908d48062449f%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274606948787033&sdata=cWiwKmHwvPqAiPMfrCr%2FQMPZEVFkEWDBm88JT4obONg%3D&reserved=0>
regarding CLOUD, SOCIAL, BUILD, BET, VACATION, DISCOUNT, WEDDING and others (...etc.) More than 30 TMs of very common terms are mentioned, and over 300 domains were found by that one blogger. There are 46 comments to that blog post, too.
I renew the call for a public comment period, so that more of these kinds of examples of can be submitted to the working group.

Sincerely,
George Kirikos
416-588-0269
http://www.leap.com/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.leap.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C25fcfecbc05849e8ef8908d48062449f%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274606948787033&sdata=TkcxkmO%2BD6pFa4SLbj4s7J8e%2BaSwOMgLv95DAH%2FZ%2FnI%3D&reserved=0>


On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Rebecca Tushnet <Rebecca.Tushnet at law.georgetown.edu<mailto:Rebecca.Tushnet at law.georgetown.edu>> wrote:
When you refuse to say what you would count as evidence of a problem, that leaves us with the evidence I, and George, and Bret, and others have offered--if we want to call them "Group 2" TMCH registrants that would make sense to me.

Rebecca Tushnet
Georgetown Law
703 593 6759



________________________________

Confidentiality Notice:
This communication constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 2510, and its disclosure is strictly limited to the recipient intended by the sender of this message. This transmission, and any attachments, may contain confidential attorney-client privileged information and attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Please contact us immediately by return e-mail or at 404 815 6500, and destroy the original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner.
________________________________

***DISCLAIMER*** Per Treasury Department Circular 230: Any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170410/4de63165/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1576 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170410/4de63165/image001-0001.gif>


More information about the gnso-rpm-wg mailing list