[gnso-rpm-wg] Recommendation for Questions #7 and #16 (Design Mark and Appropriate Balance)

[George Kirikos]

Hi folks,

On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 11:57 AM, J. Scott Evans via gnso-rpm-wg
<gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org> wrote:
> I disagree. We are not in cost benefit analysis. I know a contingent in this WG is committed to reopening a variety of issues that are settled. That is not going to happen. We should move on. Our remit is to determine whether the RPMs are functioning as designed and, if not, what adjustments need to be made to rectify this situation.

A broken clock is right two times a day, mon ami. But this is not one
of those times.***

According to our TMCH charter questions:

https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/58729944/Clean%20-%20TMCH%20Charter%20Questions%20-%206%20Jan%202017.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1484721370000&api=v2

"Are the costs and benefits of the TMCH reasonably proportionate
amongst rights holders, registries, registrars, registrants, other
members of the community and ICANN?"

and

"Does the scope of the TMCH and the protection mechanisms which flow
from it, reflect the appropriate balance between the rights of
trademark holders and the rights of non- trademark registrants?"

Answering both charter questions requires us to analyze costs and benefits.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
416-588-0269
http://www.leap.com/

P.S. Citation: *** Beauty and the Beast, 2017 (highly recommended!)