[gnso-rpm-wg] Agenda and documents for RPM Working Group call on 16 August

George Kirikos icann at leap.com
Tue Aug 15 20:48:31 UTC 2017

Hi Mary,

Reviewing the two PDFs, can you incorporate some of the additional
potential data sources/research related to sunrise that were discussed
on the mailing list this past week? Namely:

1. Whether sunrise-registered domains (defensive registrations) are
associated with a reduction in value-added services (SSL, SEO,
webdesign, hosting, etc.) relative to non-sunrise registrations, as
per email:


Data sources could include surveys of "retail" consumer-facing
registrars such (GoDaddy, Endurance, etc.) and/or their reseller
channels/networks (value-added partners).

This goes to the question of weighing the costs/benefits of sunrises
(i.e. focusing on the "costs" to other competing entities who could
have used those domain names for more than just defensive
registrations, but were denied equal access to those domains).

2. Legal searches (Westlaw, USPTO cases, etc.) to find whether any
examples of "genericide" have been related to unauthorized domain name
registrations (cybersquatting). See point #1(c) of:


rebutting the assertion that sunrises are required because trademark
owners "Must protect their TMs or risk having them cancelled"

Presumably no one challenged that assertion when creating the sunrises
for the RPMs. Let's look at actual data/statistics, to see whether the
risk was actually real or not. If few/no such cases exist, then that's
evidence that the risk is minimal or zero.

3. To measure "costs" of the sunrise period in terms of depriving that
registry of "oxygen" through a reduction of active sites found "in the
wild", perhaps do a statistical study on registry growth rates and
their relationship to sunrise size. See discussion between Volker and
myself at:


[John McCormac of HosterStats mentioned to me outside this list the
example of the large .xxx sunrise too,  where large swaths of unused
domains might have hampered its future growth] A statistical study
could examine this more scientifically and rigorously, rather than
just relying on anecdotes and personal observations.

4. For the list of domain name industry blogs (document point #6)
where sunrises were discussed and where data was shared, a good
starting point would be the list at:


(and then check each individual blog, e.g. TheDomains.com, DNW.com,
DomainInvesting.com, DomainIncite.com, OnlineDomain.com, CircleID.com
and many others)

Some of these blogs offer "sponsored posts", which might be worth
considering to solicit feedback or help with public outreach on the
various surveys that are planned.


George Kirikos

On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org> wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> The proposed agenda for our next Working Group call, scheduled for this
> Wednesday 16 August at 1700 UTC, is as follows:
> Roll call (via Adobe Connect and phone bridge only); updates to Statements
> of Interest
> Review updated, more targeted Sunrise data collection proposal (based on the
> Working Group discussion on 9 August call)
> Review initial collated draft proposal for data collection on Trademark
> Claims
> Next steps/next meeting
> For Agenda Item #2, you can see from the attached document that we have
> reorganized the multiple data collection tasks (previously listed according
> to the corresponding Sunrise Charter question) into three main groupings:
> (I) tasks that staff can initiate immediately; (II) topics organized by
> format (mostly surveys) and target group (e.g. ICANN stakeholder groups,
> external communities); and (III) topics that are likely to require
> professional assistance. Although we are asking for overall review and
> comments on the entire document, the bullets in Group (II), starting on Page
> 2, are where Working Group input is most needed.
> For Agenda Item #3, we have based the initial proposal (attached) on the
> same format as was used last week for the initial Sunrise data gathering
> discussion. You will see that, as with Sunrise, there are quite a few
> overlapping suggestions for format (e.g. survey), target groups, and
> reliance on professional resources. You will see also that it may make sense
> in some cases to combine the data request for Sunrise and Claims.
> Staff is continuing to work with the Working Group co-chairs to prepare a
> combined data and metrics resource request for the GNSO Council, in respect
> of all data collection suggestions that the Working Group agrees can benefit
> from professional assistance. Your feedback on Agenda Item #3 will therefore
> be very helpful, as it was for Sunrise.
> We will post both documents on the Working Group wiki space ahead of the
> Wednesday call as well.
> Thanks and cheers
> Mary
> From: <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Amr Elsadr
> <amr.elsadr at icann.org>
> Date: Friday, August 11, 2017 at 17:24
> To: "gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org" <gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>
> Subject: [gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items - GNSO Review of All RPMs in All gTLD
> PDP WG Call - 9 August 2017
> Dear Working Group Members,
> Apologies about the delay in delivery, but below are the action items from
> Wednesday’s WG call. The action items, notes, meeting materials, recordings
> and transcripts have all also been posted on the meeting’s wiki page here:
> https://community.icann.org/x/aA4hB[community.icann.org].
> Thanks.
> Amr
> Action Items:
> Staff to identify what data collection efforts will require surveys being
> conducted using professional assistance, and prepare a proposal to seek this
> assistance for conducting surveys, and share with the co-chairs prior to
> sharing with the WG and GNSO Council for their consideration
> Staff to begin conducting a LexisNexis search for articles resulting from
> investigative reporting on domains registered during Sunrise that have been
> noted to have an impact on free expression, fair use, and the ability of
> registrants to register domains, and share results with the WG
> Staff to identify which contracted parties are publicly traded, so that WG
> is aware that their annual reports should be publicly available in
> compliance with SEC regulations
> Staff to identify what data is already currently available, and report this
> to the co-chairs on Friday – staff should begin collection of this data
> immediately
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg

More information about the gnso-rpm-wg mailing list