[gnso-rpm-wg] Recommendation for Question#10 (Appropriate Strings for Notification)

[Paul Keating]

I have NO desire to expand any rights accorded to trademark holders.  I believe they have been expanded beyond that which is reasonable or supportable given legal and policy constraints.  

Sent from my iPad

> On 25 Apr 2017, at 20:32, Rebecca Tushnet <Rebecca.Tushnet at law.georgetown.edu> wrote:
> 
> That's because it came from words that weren't mine.
> 
> If no one at all is interested in defending the "expanding the match"
> proposal that this thread is supposed to cover, does that mean that we
> have a consensus that it's not worth pursuing?  I'm not sure what the
> procedure for determining that would be.
> Rebecca Tushnet
> Georgetown Law
> 703 593 6759
> 
> 
>> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Paul Keating <paul at law.es> wrote:
>> I'm sorry but these 2 statements seem to be in conflict with each other.....
>> 
>> I don't in fact think that the TMCH contains names of those individuals who've been wrongly deterred from registering domain names they had a right to register.
>> 
>> As has been discussed for a while, I think it contains other relevant evidence, like more words like "cloud" and "hotel" that prima facie don't seem likely to justify preemptive rights across new gTLDs.
>> 
>> I am more concerned about the latter but must say I really don't understand what is meant by the former.
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPad
>> 
>>> On 25 Apr 2017, at 16:22, Scott Austin <SAustin at vlplawgroup.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I don't in fact think that the
>>>    TMCH contains names of those individuals who've been wrongly deterred
>>>    from registering domain names they had a right to register.  As has
>>>    been discussed for a while, I think it contains other relevant
>>>    evidence, like more words like "cloud" and "hotel" that prima facie
>>>    don't seem likely to justify preemptive rights across new gTLDs.