[gnso-rpm-wg] 99%+ reduction in sunrise utilization rate per TLD supports EFF call for elimination of sunrise
marie.pattullo at aim.be
Mon Aug 14 15:21:39 UTC 2017
Thanks, Cyntia, not least for highlighting one of the essential aspects of both ICANN and TMs – consumer protection.
A DN that is live just for a few days can, as we know, result in malware, phishing, advertising revenue… because good-faith consumers click through to it. And all that before considering the content of the site. Ex-post enforcement – as well as the costs etc. already described – results in harm to good faith consumers. Even a successful UDRP, with a transfer, can mean the TM owner having to maintain (and pay for) a DN they never wanted, simply to prevent consumer confusion & harm: e.g. I know of toy brands who have taken action against, and now own, DNs that have attracted children to content they really should not ever see. All of this harm is proved, on record and known: we should not sacrifice consumer protection on the altar of making a quick buck.
Opening a refreshment stand to sell horse urine under a well-known TM (the latter having specific protections anyway) … well, horse urine is indeed a favourite stabiliser for fake whisky producers but I’m pretty sure consumers, and public health inspectors, wouldn’t treat this deliberate fraud so lightly. Why is the theoretical domain speculator worthy of more protection than consumers, given that there are almost infinite possible DNs from which the good-faith speculator/business/registrant can choose rather than, in this example, a WKM?
As for TM owners being the beneficiaries of positive discrimination, the ability for TM owner to (pay to) register in Sunrise (assuming it has paid to satisfy the legal requirements to register a TM and then paid to record it in the TMCH) does not mean it will (pay to) register a DN in Sunrise. Just as receiving a Notice doesn’t mean a TM owner will automatically take action against you; I can’t envisage a TM owner (who knows enough about the law & practice of TMs and DNs to have registered a TM and recorded it in the TMCH) taking spurious action against TM.somethingtotallyunconnected. Suggesting that all TMCH record owners will automatically (a) want that DN in every gTLD and (b) take action against anyone else trying to register such a DN anywhere at all and that (c) all of this is automatic and easy and cheap… is just silly. And not true.
As for there being no effective non-TM registrants constituency within ICANN, I beg to differ. A cursory look at this list, or indeed any list out-with the CSG, may show less than TM-friendly voices.
From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Cking Modern IP
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 1:53 PM
To: gnso-rpm-wg <gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>; George Kirikos <icann at leap.com>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] 99%+ reduction in sunrise utilization rate per TLD supports EFF call for elimination of sunrise
It seems there's no point you can't talk to death.
8 paragraphs on ranting, 1 to chide me for being ready to vote on thie Sunrise iaaue (let's not be obtuse), & 1 to slam ICANN. It is enough & is becoming a waste of my time.
Your arguments have been unpersuasive, the personal commentary boorish & the hyperbole distracting.
I'm interested in hearing a bit more about Volker's proposal. Then perhaps we should address this issue & move on.
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 6:13 AM -0500, "George Kirikos" <icann at leap.com<mailto:icann at leap.com>> wrote:
You should know me better by now, after all these years.
"Though this be madness, yet there is method in 't." --- Hamlet
Rick Mercer wrote an excellent piece "Why I rant. And why you should too."
"Ranting is a 'skill'
Everyone should rant. Ranting not only makes you feel better but
occasionally, as my mother proved to me many times, you might get
results—justice, satisfaction or a fudge stick.
Canadians don’t rant enough. We are busy people and I get that. We
don’t necessarily have the time or the inclination to come across like
mad people who are constantly barking about waste, corruption and lack
of transparency in three different levels of government.
But the danger in not ranting is dire. If we as a nation don’t rant
then the powers that be will use that complacency against us.
Hopefully it will dawn on Canadians that the one thing we shouldn’t
care about is what the government thinks of us or what names they call
us. Prime ministers, premiers and cabinet ministers aren’t our
friends; they are just people in bad suits who work for us.
We are the boss. And if they want to work for us they have to listen
to us, answer our questions and occasionally, like all employees,
listen to the boss rant."
A rant, agreed, but not not a bombastic (empty) one, but instead a
methodical rant full of content and purpose, asking questions about
limits of TMs, examples of genericide, and so on, interleaved with
'emotional' appeals. A very *strategic* rant. An intelligent choice
to rant after looking at the playing field carefully.
Take a look at the 2016 US Presidential election, and the Brexit
votes. Which campaigns were more 'professional', yet which sides
ultimately one? ;-) This is adaptive learning at work.
I'm sure quite a lot of "professional" analysis and discourse has led
to serious errors of policy at ICANN. I'm sure a lot of professionals
made predictions about new gTLDs and appropriate strategies, for
themselves and their clients, all now proven wrong. Many folks lost
money, time, and careers due to those mistakes, betting the wrong way.
They're looking for a new direction, superior analysis, and better
solutions than those of the past.
In the separate IGO PDP, for example, which shares some of the same
membership as this working group, I need not rant as much, as the
circumstances warrant different strategic behaviour. By the way, that
PDP has a much narrower scope than this one, yet has taken 3 years
(and followed up on a prior one that 'punted' some topics to this
one). Thanks for letting us all know you're 'ready to vote', well in
advance of data collection and analysis and arguments. By the time we
actually get to a final report and consensus vote in 2022 or so, I'll
be sure to look back at yesterday's email from you and smile. No one
has ever lost money betting on ICANN delays. We've spent the last year
or so on procedural issues, and finalizing various *questions*. Then,
there's data collection. Then, there's analysis. Then there's
arguments. Then there's iteration. The public will eventually weigh in
at some point, and then we get to do things all over again.
I think the evidence-based policy making (as opposed to the flawed
policymaking at ICANN that got us here, which was based on incorrect
conjectures and weak analysis) will ultimately lead us in the right
On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 8:10 PM, Cyntia King wrote:
> Hi George,
> You’re not “educating” me - I fully understand the difference between professional discourse & bombastic rant. You draw a false equivalence between matters of assault/human suffering and domain registrations. This isn’t “wallop” it’s disregard for the relative importance of these events. Let’s keep our arguments professional & not needlessly provocative.
> I have read your emails & I understand your POV.
> I have presented my own views & I’m satisfied you understand them.
> I’m ready to vote.
> Cyntia King
> E: cking at modernip
> O: +1 81-ModernIP
> C: +1 818.209.6088
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the gnso-rpm-wg