[gnso-rpm-wg] TMCH Blog

Doug Isenberg disenberg at gigalawfirm.com
Thu Feb 2 17:52:51 UTC 2017

What is the source/basis/explanation for the following statement: "it's only the 'biggest companies' that have a real problem with cybersquatting, in terms of economic costs"?  While larger companies may be more well-known than smaller companies, and therefore more likely to attract cybersquatters, I've seen plenty of small companies suffer significantly as the result of only a single instance of cybersquatting.

Doug Isenberg

-----Original Message-----
From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of George Kirikos
Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2017 12:46 PM
To: trachtenbergm at gtlaw.com
Cc: gnso-rpm-wg <gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] TMCH Blog

Marc: That's the elegance of the "market" mechanism --- no one has to agree to some "valuation" of the trademarks --- by setting an explicit price to the sunrise privilege (i.e. instead of that privilege costing merely $300 or whatever the TMCH fees are, it would be much higher), be design only the high value trademark owners would be prepared to pay that price, to deter cybersquatting.

One can't protect all trademarks from cybersquatting, nor can one protect all domain names during sunrise from being misappropriated or misallocated through misuse of marginal trademarks. By setting an appropriate price, a better balance is achieved than exists now.

"I don’t think your proposed auction system would be fair or practical for that matter and would create a system where only the biggest companies could protect their trademark rights in new gTLDS through the RPMs."

Life isn't "fair" -- some folks are wealthier than others. That will always be the case, in a capitalist society.

Furthermore, it's only the "biggest companies" that have a real problem with cybersquatting, in terms of economic costs. If 90% of the abuse happens with a relatively small proportion of markholders, the system should be targeted to where that abuse is actually happening, and filter it by the economic size (through an explicit price).

Where ICANN has it wrong at present is trying to design a "one size fits all" solution --- that left it wide open for gaming, where the marginal trademark registrations are being abused.


George Kirikos

More information about the gnso-rpm-wg mailing list