[gnso-rpm-wg] [renamed] Geographic indications

Wed Feb 8 18:57:51 UTC 2017

I think the larger point is that people are putting *trademarks* in the
TMCH Database, which is exactly what was intended.  Some trademarks have
other meanings, some of them as geographical terms, and some don't.  But
nobody is putting a "geographic term" as such into the TMCH Database.  By
contrast, some people are putting "geographical indications" (GIs) as such
into the TMCH Database.

Here's WIPO's definition of a *Geographical Indication*:

*A geographical indication (GI) is a sign used on products that have a
specific geographical origin and possess qualities or a reputation that are
due to that origin. In order to function as a GI, a sign must identify a
product as originating in a given place. In addition, the qualities,
characteristics or reputation of the product should be essentially due to
the place of origin. Since the qualities depend on the geographical place
of production, there is a clear link between the product and its original
place of production.*

I don't think it's useful to treat  "Geographic indications, geographic
indicators and geographic names" both as "ordinary definitions and terms of
art" like one big ball of wax.  The distinctions are important, and their
meaning (or lack of meaning) in trademark law is important to distinguish
and understand in our discussions.  Nor is it helpful to mash the
discussion of these together without realizing the distinctions.  Rather, I
think we should try to use the proper vocabulary (while being corrective
(without being critical) of attempts that go astray).

"*Geographical Indications*" is the proper term of art for what's described
above in italics.  In casual usage, people (including trademark experts)s
may use "geographic indications" or "geographic indicators" when they mean
Geographical Indications (GIs).  We may want to avoid using all of these
terms interchangeably, and instead use only "Geographical Indications" or
"GIs" when that's what we mean.  In part, that is because the other terms
may have other,potentially conflicting meanings.  I've seen "geographic
indicators" used as if it's synonymous with "geographic terms"; and I've
seen "geographic indicators" used (in social sciences and similar data) to
mean variables created to describe the area of residence of the subject of
a study or a respondent to a survey.

On the other hand "geographic names" and "geographic terms" generally
refers to the use of terms in their geographic meaning (i.e., as a place
name).  We should use one or the other (or maybe both, I don't want to be
too much of a stickler) when we mean place names functioning as such.
Personally, I think "geographic terms" is a bit more precise.

Geographic terms can also function as trademarks, but there is a higher bar
to get certain geographic names registered as trademarks (i.e., those that
are "primarily geographically descriptive").  Where a registered trademark
is also a geographic term, it generally needed to have cleared that higher
bar.  At the risk of simplifying too much, the mark needs to acquire
secondary meaning (also called "acquired distinctiveness in this context),
which means that (in the eye of a consumer) the "string" is functioning as
a trademark and not as a geographic term.

There are also times when geographic names function neither as trademarks
nor as geographic terms, e.g., "dotted swiss," "Boston baked beans," "Swiss
cheese," "Early American design," and "Italian spaghetti" (examples given
in the USPTO's Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure).  There are also
geographic names that are obscure and thus won't be considered "primarily
geographically descriptive").

The details of this area are way, way beyond the scope of this email, and
this is both a bit simplified and also US-centric.  If you want to see how
the USPTO instructs its trademark examiners to analyze trademark
applications containing geographic terms, see
https://tmep.uspto.gov/RDMS/TMEP/current#/current/TMEP-1200d1e8253.html

But my main point is that "Geographical Indications" are a specific type of
source-identifying use of geographic terms and that trademarks that are
also geographic terms are a different type of source-identifying use, and
that neither should be confused with "geographic terms" or "geographic
names" functioning as such.

My subsidiary point is that these need to be distinguished when we're
analyzing this area, and not mushed together.

Greg

*Greg Shatan*
C: 917-816-6428
S: gsshatan
gregshatanipc at gmail.com

On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Winterfeldt, Brian J. <
BWinterfeldt at mayerbrown.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>
>
> I agree with the points raised by Marc and J. Scott.  It is very important
> to keep these distinctions in mind while discussing TMCH rules.  This is
> another example of why educational services are so important.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Brian
>
> *Brian J. Winterfeldt*
>
> Co-Head of Global Brand Management and Internet Practice
>
> Mayer Brown LLP
>
> bwinterfeldt at mayerbrown.com
>
> 1999 K Street, NW
>
> Washington, DC  20006-1101
>
> 202.263.3284 direct dial
>
> 202.830.0330 fax
>
>
>
> 1221 Avenue of the Americas
>
> New York, New York  10020-1001
>
> 212.506.2345 direct dial
>
> On Feb 8, 2017, at 12:30 PM, J. Scott Evans via gnso-rpm-wg <
> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org> wrote:
>
> Yes. Let me chime in here. This is where words are important:  “Geographic
> Indicators” are a specific subset of intellectual property that are similar
> to trademarks in their protection, but there is a very specific criterion
> that these indicators must meet to be receive the protection.
>
> J. Scott
>
> *J. Scott Evans* *| Associate General Counsel - Trademarks, Copyright,
> Domains & Marketing |*
>
> *Adobe *
>
> 345 Park Avenue
>
> San Jose, CA 95110
> 408.536.5336 <(408)%20536-5336> (tel), 408.709.6162 <(408)%20709-6162>
> (cell)
> jsevans at adobe.com
>
> www.adobe.com
>
>
>
> From: <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Massimo <
> massimo at origin-gi.com>
> Date: Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 9:16 AM
> To: "trachtenbergm at gtlaw.com" <trachtenbergm at gtlaw.com>, "
> kathy at kathykleiman.com" <kathy at kathykleiman.com>, "gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org"
> <gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] [renamed] Geographic indications
>
> Thank you Kathy and Marc.
>
>
>
> I agree with Marc, the 3 marks listed by Kathy are not being used as
> geographical indications. The interest of question 8 for me is to enquire
> on those marks filed under paragraph 2.4.1 of the TMCH guidelines (marks
> protected by Statute or Treaty) : “For marks protected by statute or
> treaty, the relevant statute or treaty must be in effect at the time the
> mark is submitted to the Clearinghouse for inclusion. These marks may
> include but are not limited to: geographical indications and designations
> of origin”.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Massimo
>
>
>
> *From:* trachtenbergm at gtlaw.com [mailto:trachtenbergm at gtlaw.com
> <trachtenbergm at gtlaw.com>]
> *Sent:* 08 February 2017 17:58
> *To:* kathy at kathykleiman.com; Massimo <Massimo at origin-gi.com>;
> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* RE: [gnso-rpm-wg] [renamed] Geographic indications
>
>
>
> Kathy,
>
>
>
> I would note that at least for the first 3 marks listed below, they are
> not being used as geographic indicators.  Rather, they are registered in
> connection with the following goods/services:
>
>
>
> Class 09: Apparatus for recording, transmission or reproduction of sound,
> images or data; Data carriers of all types with and without data; Software;
> Electronic publications [downloadable]; Data processing equipment; Computer
>
>
>
> class 35: Advertising; Online advertising in a computer network;
> Publication of printed products [also in electronic form] for advertising
> purposes; Presentation of companies on the Internet and other media;
> Mediation of trade and economic contacts, also via the Internet; Public
> relations [public relations]; Managing directors; Business administration;
> Office work; Compilation, updating and maintenance of data in computer
> databases; Systematization of data in computer databases; Collecting and
> arranging of topic-referred press articles
>
>
>
> Class 38: Providing access to computer programs on data networks;
> Providing access to information on the Internet, in particular via
> smartphones; Providing access to server services on the Internet; Providing
> Internet chatrooms; Providing online conversation folders and electronic
> mailboxes for transferring messages between users to software applications;
> Providing portals on the Internet; Computer support, namely providing
> access to software program versions via websites, by e-mail, telephone and
> other terminals suitable for telecommunications as support services for
> troubleshooting; Wireless electronic transmission of data, documents,
> information, messages and software applications; Electronic transmission
> and streaming of digital content to third parties via worldwide and local
> computer networks; E-mail services; Message and image transmission by
> computer; Telecommunications, in particular telecommunications via
> platforms and portals on the Internet; Providing access to databases;
> Forwarding all kinds of Internet addresses [Web messaging]
>
>
>
> As discussed any times before, a dictionary word or name of a place can
> have a different meaning depending on the context.  In some contexts the
> word can have source indicative (i.e., trademark) meaning when used in
> connection with goods or services unrelated to the word.  In other
> contexts, the word can have generic or descriptive meaning.  For example,
> APPLE has source indicating/trademark meaning when used in connection with
> computers and devices, but generic or descriptive meaning when used in
> connection with apples.  Similarly, “Rome” could be used as a geographic
> indicator to refer to the city in Italy in one context or have source
> indicating/trademark meaning in another, such as ROME Furntiture.
>
>
>
> Furthermore, since the example below says “registrants”, presumably the
> clams notice did deter them from registering the names, which it should not
> have if they are making a fair or descriptive use of the names.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> *Marc H. Trachtenberg*
> Shareholder
> Greenberg Traurig, LLP | 77 West Wacker Drive | Suite 3100 | Chicago, IL
> 60601
> Tel 312.456.1020 <(312)%20456-1020>
>
> Mobile 773.677.3305 <(773)%20677-3305>
>
> trachtenbergm at gtlaw.com | www.gtlaw.com
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gtlaw.com%2F&data=01%7C01%7CBwinterfeldt%40mayerbrown.com%7Cdae834e329314f53003708d4504827d4%7C09131022b7854e6d8d42916975e51262%7C0&sdata=dp2B%2FiDWBImGdUmzPnzFveHsw7ClApK%2FA1COL7PoKwk%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> [image: Greenberg Traurig]
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:*gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org
> <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Kathy Kleiman
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 08, 2017 10:24 AM
> *To:* massimo at origin-gi.com; gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* [gnso-rpm-wg] [renamed] Geographic indications
>
>
>
> Massimo,
>
> Tx you for posting information about Geographic Indications. Others
> responded privately to share that they see geographic terms and indicators
> in the TMCH Database - some of which are coming from
> design/style/figurative marks (linking TMCH charter questions 7 and 8).
>
> Specifically, John Berryhill shares that registrants he works with have
> received TM Claims Notices for:
>
> - Munich  --- https://register.dpma.de/DPMAregister/marke/register/
> 3020130626206/DE
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__register.dpma.de_DPMAregister_marke_register_3020130626206_DE%26d%3DDwMDaQ%26c%3D2s2mvbfY0UoSKkl6_Ol9wg%26r%3DL7MB7eHT-UoCXD4iA3c7Sm3JrKXt7T1dG3NjBzCxm1c%26m%3DmOjUqh2jGqkyLM0GsTBemiVvTUIIrhE1cnR-JgjohS0%26s%3D-ilAU1MAaJUL-TG2B6iSrSFzOpqlkYqIZcsrnt6BMl0%26e%3D&data=01%7C01%7CBwinterfeldt%40mayerbrown.com%7Cdae834e329314f53003708d4504827d4%7C09131022b7854e6d8d42916975e51262%7C0&sdata=D2zzeE8LLM708SdOrggdcqpG%2BeroxAtsYPZcFGE63Gc%3D&reserved=0>
>
> - Muenchen   --- https://register.dpma.de/DPMAregister/marke/register/
> 3020130626192/DE
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__register.dpma.de_DPMAregister_marke_register_3020130626192_DE%26d%3DDwMDaQ%26c%3D2s2mvbfY0UoSKkl6_Ol9wg%26r%3DL7MB7eHT-UoCXD4iA3c7Sm3JrKXt7T1dG3NjBzCxm1c%26m%3DmOjUqh2jGqkyLM0GsTBemiVvTUIIrhE1cnR-JgjohS0%26s%3DomKayKP9cG7bgeZpFzA8o97o8p-KfL_RWdA4jDtVNyM%26e%3D&data=01%7C01%7CBwinterfeldt%40mayerbrown.com%7Cdae834e329314f53003708d4504827d4%7C09131022b7854e6d8d42916975e51262%7C0&sdata=jj92vdMeUnCD%2BUK8z2SOrsGSXbQio%2F0vw7qgEGkoxDw%3D&reserved=0>
>
> - Munchen  --- https://register.dpma.de/DPMAregister/marke/register/
> 3020130626214/DE
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__register.dpma.de_DPMAregister_marke_register_3020130626214_DE%26d%3DDwMDaQ%26c%3D2s2mvbfY0UoSKkl6_Ol9wg%26r%3DL7MB7eHT-UoCXD4iA3c7Sm3JrKXt7T1dG3NjBzCxm1c%26m%3DmOjUqh2jGqkyLM0GsTBemiVvTUIIrhE1cnR-JgjohS0%26s%3DTN4bwErzPTxS3VKDpoKH_LZx1RHp2FDylEzyY2dqYrI%26e%3D&data=01%7C01%7CBwinterfeldt%40mayerbrown.com%7Cdae834e329314f53003708d4504827d4%7C09131022b7854e6d8d42916975e51262%7C0&sdata=3k3kf%2FF0%2BN%2BPSYmZkJZuBtcRL9S7ylpivODMwcNzs9E%3D&reserved=0>
>
> - Tahiti  - French trademark
>
> -  Ireland -- UK trademark
>
> He notes that the registrants were using the domain names in
> geographically descriptive ways.
>
> Best, Kathy
>
>
>
> On 2/7/2017 11:04 AM, Massimo wrote:
>
> Dear Mary,
>
>
>
> I am not sure I understand the answer provided to question 8 on
> Geographical Indications: *As of January 2017, no registry operator has
> pursued the option of including marks within the category of “"Other marks
> that constitute intellectual property and meet a registry's individual
> requirements".*
>
>
>
> I am aware of at least one case where a Geographical Indication has been
> submitted under TMCH guidelines 2.4.1 and accepted as Geographical
> Indication. It might well be the only case. But, again, I am not sure I
> understand the answer provided to question 8.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Massimo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Mr Massimo Vittori*
>
> Managing Director – oriGIn
>
> 1, rue de Varembé 1202, Geneva, Switzerland
>
> Telephone: +41 (0) 22 755 07 32 <+41%2022%20755%2007%2032>
>
> E-mail: *massimo at origin-gi.com <massimo at origin-gi.com>*
>
> *www.origin-gi.com
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttp-3A__www.origin-2Dgi.com_%26d%3DDwMDaQ%26c%3D2s2mvbfY0UoSKkl6_Ol9wg%26r%3DL7MB7eHT-UoCXD4iA3c7Sm3JrKXt7T1dG3NjBzCxm1c%26m%3DmOjUqh2jGqkyLM0GsTBemiVvTUIIrhE1cnR-JgjohS0%26s%3DC_Z6IpsqYXyd1fiXT1eoq_kCbz3rTXDKQXHHaGb1PXk%26e%3D&data=01%7C01%7CBwinterfeldt%40mayerbrown.com%7Cdae834e329314f53003708d4504827d4%7C09131022b7854e6d8d42916975e51262%7C0&sdata=rm9T4D1Htrtv4CFBJayC2oBebqLDxxCw1BPM0W4e2Qw%3D&reserved=0>*
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <image002.gif>
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__twitter.com_oriGInNetwork%26d%3DDwMDaQ%26c%3D2s2mvbfY0UoSKkl6_Ol9wg%26r%3DL7MB7eHT-UoCXD4iA3c7Sm3JrKXt7T1dG3NjBzCxm1c%26m%3DmOjUqh2jGqkyLM0GsTBemiVvTUIIrhE1cnR-JgjohS0%26s%3DD7JUzwo16Grttso_xdatdcOlMw-RVi1llNSBNBgCU7s%26e%3D&data=01%7C01%7CBwinterfeldt%40mayerbrown.com%7Cdae834e329314f53003708d4504827d4%7C09131022b7854e6d8d42916975e51262%7C0&sdata=vJFx83y2LnJ93avCXsXZdMYrn124N3ZjsMDRRLscNKo%3D&reserved=0>
> <image003.gif>
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_origin-2Dthe-2Dorganization-2Dfor-2Dan-2Dinternational-2Dgeographical-2Dindications-2Dnetwork%26d%3DDwMDaQ%26c%3D2s2mvbfY0UoSKkl6_Ol9wg%26r%3DL7MB7eHT-UoCXD4iA3c7Sm3JrKXt7T1dG3NjBzCxm1c%26m%3DmOjUqh2jGqkyLM0GsTBemiVvTUIIrhE1cnR-JgjohS0%26s%3DwE-oecDH9ftFNyabffW1Hbo_3tFQl4kbMuDhIRvF-s4%26e%3D&data=01%7C01%7CBwinterfeldt%40mayerbrown.com%7Cdae834e329314f53003708d4504827d4%7C09131022b7854e6d8d42916975e51262%7C0&sdata=q5KXOcV3QwEzP%2FjpMwiUTHRXIIT9qAbJHLnfeaN6SVc%3D&reserved=0>
> <image004.jpg>
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__www.youtube.com_user_oriGInNetwork1%26d%3DDwMDaQ%26c%3D2s2mvbfY0UoSKkl6_Ol9wg%26r%3DL7MB7eHT-UoCXD4iA3c7Sm3JrKXt7T1dG3NjBzCxm1c%26m%3DmOjUqh2jGqkyLM0GsTBemiVvTUIIrhE1cnR-JgjohS0%26s%3DNGqdcpAnNcPLAmJ2jzcykDF8cOZd9c0ETfwE-sSSqPg%26e%3D&data=01%7C01%7CBwinterfeldt%40mayerbrown.com%7Cdae834e329314f53003708d4504827d4%7C09131022b7854e6d8d42916975e51262%7C0&sdata=hT00LNlJZfEpJ%2BLSbtKjhv57CoDEM6z6OUdfgZJFoeE%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
>
>
> *CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this e-mail message and any
> attachments are confidential and are intended solely for addressee. The
> information may also be legally privileged. This transmission is sent in
> trust, for the sole purpose of delivery to the intended recipient. If you
> have received this transmission in error, any use, reproduction or
> dissemination of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not
> the intended recipient, please immediately notify the sender by reply
> e-mail or phone and delete this message and its attachments, if any.*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:*gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org
> <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Mary Wong
> *Sent:* 06 February 2017 15:50
> *To:* gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* [gnso-rpm-wg] Second table summarizing TMCH Charter questions,
> relevant input and potential follow up
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> Following on the circulation of the previous summary table of the
> questions, input and discussions so far on TMCH Charter Questions
> categories 1 and 2 (below), please find attached a similar summary table
> for the remaining categories (3 – 6). As the Working Group has yet to begin
> discussing these, staff has taken the liberty of adding what we believe to
> be relevant background information from the community comments to the TMCH
> that were provided for the 2015 RPM Paper.
>
>
>
> We will post both tables to the Working Group wiki for your easy reference
> as well.
>
>
>
> Thanks and cheers
>
> Mary
>
>
>
> *From: *Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org>
> *Date: *Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 18:18
> *To: *"gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org" <gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Table summarizing TMCH Charter questions, WG follow up
> questions, and input from Deloitte and Registry Operators
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> As discussed at the end of the Working Group call yesterday, staff has
> begun to compile a table that combines the agreed TMCH Charter questions
> with the relevant Working Group follow up questions, Deloitte response (if
> any), and (where applicable) input that was received from various registry
> operators and the Registries Stakeholder Group (note that the Registries SG
> is the only community group so far that has provided us with a response to
> our initial solicitation for input from all the various Supporting
> Organizations, Advisory Committees and GNSO Stakeholder Groups and
> Constituencies).
>
>
>
> Attached is the compilation we have done for TMCH Categories 1 (Education)
> and 2 (Verification and Updating of TMCH Data). As Kathy and others noted
> on the call, not all questions have direct responses, and in some cases we
> have inserted what we thought might be relevant information even if it is
> not an actual reply. Do let us know if you spot any inaccuracies or
> omissions.
>
>
>
> We hope you find the document useful. If we may, we suggest that you
> review it with a view toward identifying the following:
>
> ·         *What additional data or follow up input is needed, and from
> whom, to complete our review of these aspects of the TMCH?*
>
> ·         *What additional data or follow up input should we request from
> Deloitte, including for our expected discussion with them at ICANN58?*
>
>
>
> Please note that we have not yet included any information from the
> Analysis Group’s review of the TMCH, as we understand that a Final Report
> will be forthcoming from them shortly, and possibly before ICANN58. We will
> incorporate any relevant data once the Final Report is out, and will in the
> meantime continue working on a table for the remaining TMCH Charter
> categories and questions.
>
>
>
> The full Deloitte response to the TMCH Data Gathering questions and the
> three responses we received to the set of Registry-directed questions can
> be found here: https://community.icann.org/x/_pHRAw
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__community.icann.org_x_-5FpHRAw%26d%3DDwMDaQ%26c%3D2s2mvbfY0UoSKkl6_Ol9wg%26r%3DL7MB7eHT-UoCXD4iA3c7Sm3JrKXt7T1dG3NjBzCxm1c%26m%3DmOjUqh2jGqkyLM0GsTBemiVvTUIIrhE1cnR-JgjohS0%26s%3Dj1dzQaxlhM5xBUhXEYRGC0lh_4M1Z-WKmCcEoU5x7NY%26e%3D&data=01%7C01%7CBwinterfeldt%40mayerbrown.com%7Cdae834e329314f53003708d4504827d4%7C09131022b7854e6d8d42916975e51262%7C0&sdata=0J9RjvIamXdamucUbQtNy%2BWJnyS8CEHt7%2FJ0M9vmO%2BI%3D&reserved=0>.
>
>
>
>
> The full Registries Stakeholder Group response to our early solicitation
> for overall input can be found here: https://community.icann.org/
> download/attachments/59643854/RySG%20RPM%20Response_05JUL16.pdf?version=1&
> modificationDate=1468352438000&api=v2
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__community.icann.org_download_attachments_59643854_RySG-2520RPM-2520Response-5F05JUL16.pdf-3Fversion-3D1-26modificationDate-3D1468352438000-26api-3Dv2%26d%3DDwMDaQ%26c%3D2s2mvbfY0UoSKkl6_Ol9wg%26r%3DL7MB7eHT-UoCXD4iA3c7Sm3JrKXt7T1dG3NjBzCxm1c%26m%3DmOjUqh2jGqkyLM0GsTBemiVvTUIIrhE1cnR-JgjohS0%26s%3DpYnmfdJT0T2YnwjwuF10ZkyTBa3KLsqX9ZFv-2wmcQo%26e%3D&data=01%7C01%7CBwinterfeldt%40mayerbrown.com%7Cdae834e329314f53003708d4504827d4%7C09131022b7854e6d8d42916975e51262%7C0&sdata=9pm3gbdnfYhhvJ%2F7x0r7eP1I96T%2FQfW0E29UVfZjQRU%3D&reserved=0>.
>
>
>
>
> Thanks and cheers
>
> Mary
>
>
>
>
>
> Mary Wong
>
> Senior Policy Director
>
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
>
> Email: mary.wong at icann.org
>
> Telephone: +1-603-5744889 <(603)%20574-4889>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
>
> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_gnso-2Drpm-2Dwg%26d%3DDwMDaQ%26c%3D2s2mvbfY0UoSKkl6_Ol9wg%26r%3DL7MB7eHT-UoCXD4iA3c7Sm3JrKXt7T1dG3NjBzCxm1c%26m%3DmOjUqh2jGqkyLM0GsTBemiVvTUIIrhE1cnR-JgjohS0%26s%3DBOn0COktXnlY7S5mRoz47wuShpcxYo0_aaOCLZXdlg4%26e%3D&data=01%7C01%7CBwinterfeldt%40mayerbrown.com%7Cdae834e329314f53003708d4504827d4%7C09131022b7854e6d8d42916975e51262%7C0&sdata=ufvQ6Xgu%2BCor6dwLkZ2w28Z391yi4A2sbM%2BgQAmfDto%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> If you are not an intended recipient of confidential and privileged
> information in this email, please delete it, notify us immediately at
> postmaster at gtlaw.com, and do not use or disseminate such information.
>
> <image001.jpg>
>
> <image002.gif>
>
> <image003.gif>
>
> <image004.jpg>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fgnso-
> rpm-wg&data=01%7C01%7CBwinterfeldt%40mayerbrown.com%
> 7Cdae834e329314f53003708d4504827d4%7C09131022b7854e6d8d42916975e5
> 1262%7C0&sdata=B5uiqLtkRJjyfCUCd1NyIM%2BPhD5NQg9JZFdUd1iV%2FxY%3D&
> reserved=0
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
>
>
> This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the
> use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have
> received this email in error please notify the system manager. If you are
> not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this
> e-mail.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170208/e2abebdf/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 6399 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170208/e2abebdf/image001-0001.jpg>