[gnso-rpm-wg] Mp3, Attendance, AC recording & AC Chat Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) in all gTLDs PDP Working Group

Terri Agnew terri.agnew at icann.org
Wed Feb 22 12:50:31 UTC 2017

Dear All,


Please find the attendance of the call attached to this email. The MP3,
Adobe Connect recording and Adobe Connect chat below for the Review of all
Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) in all gTLDs PDP Working Group call held
on Wednesday, 22 February 2017 at 04:00 UTC. Attendance of the call is
posted on agenda wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/V53DAw


MP3:   https://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-rpm-review-22feb17-en.mp3


Adobe Connect recording:

The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master
Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar

** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **


Mailing list archives:  <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/>


Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/wCWAAw


Thank you.

Kind regards,

Terri Agnew



Adobe Connect chat transcript for 22 February 2017:     

     Terri Agnew:Welcome to the Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms
(RPMs) in all gTLDs PDP Working Group on Wednesday, 22 February 2017 at
04:00 UTC for 60 minutes

  Terri Agnew:agenda wiki page:

  Heather Forrest:Hi Terri!

  George Kirikos:Hi folks.

  Heather Forrest:Thanks for the sound check, Terri!

  Philip Corwin:Hello all

  David McAuley:Hello all

  Steve Levy:Hi all

  Mary Wong:Welcome, everyone

  Petter Rindforth:I like this time of the day - for once it was quick and
easy to join the call without a queue :-)

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:And it's great to see Heather

  Philip Corwin:@Petter--are you a very early riser or an insomniac? ;-)

  Philip Corwin:Hi Heather

  Heather Forrest:Hi Phil!

  George Kirikos:I think we had around 30 the last time we were in this time

  Heather Forrest:It's great to be here - this is my only ICANN call during
normal working hours!! I LOVE RPM PDP!

  Petter Rindforth:Rather the later...

  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):hello all

  Mary Wong:@Heather, you mean you love it once every four times? :)

  Heather Forrest:@Mary - exactly, but RPM PDP is the best in my book!

  Greg Shatan:Heather, you can follow this with the CCWG Accountability
Staff Accountability Subgroup and the Next Gen RDS group after that....

  Michael Flemming:I can second Heather. This is the one PDP call during
earthly hours.

  Heather Forrest:@Greg - you are a mean person

  George Kirikos:Champagne, Feta, etc.

  Heather Forrest:Question: To Greg's point, does Q8 focus only on GIs that
are not otherwise registered as a TM (ie, certification marks)?

  GraceM:Should geographic tLDs be eligible for TMCH?

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Someone's TV is on

  George Kirikos:Someone has background music.

  George Kirikos:*6 to mute/unmute

  Mary Wong:I can respond

  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):GEO TLDs have letters of non-objection/support from
the local authorities, who have rights for the name

  George Kirikos:Philadelphia for Cheese, etc.

  Greg Shatan:Philadelphia is not a GI for cheese, it

  George Kirikos:Right, Greg. It's a geographical term, that is a regular

  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):like to have somecity.tld they need to have a letter
of support from the local government of somecity who has rights for use of
somecity name 

  Greg Shatan:is just a trademark and not serving a geographical term in the

  Mary Wong:@Heather, hope that helped - at the moment I don't think we know
if the TMCH is accepting certification marks as long as they are
nationally/regionally registered, or if they are also accepting G.I.s if
they are protected by a certain national law.

  Justine Chew:@Kathy: Going backwards, what would TMCH rely on to validate
GI that is not also a trademark?

  Heather Forrest:Thanks, Mary. It seems to me that the TM case is easier,
as this is backed up by an entry in the national register, whereas national
laws/court decisions require more human input

  Greg Shatan:Certification marks are a specific class of trademarks; why
wouldn't they be accepted in the TMCH?

  Heather Forrest:Exactly, Greg

  Mary Wong:@Greg, I think the puzzlement may be whether the TMCH is
accepting G.I.s beyond TM/certification marks.

  Heather Forrest:@Mary - that makes sense, and definitely should be
followed up

  Justine Chew:@Mary: Agreed.

  Michael Flemming:Greg, can you use headphones?

  Heather Forrest:Phil, Greg, it sounds like one of you has the echo 

  George Kirikos:Some of these aren't for Deloitte.

  Mary Wong:@Greg, we did not ask Deloitte this question

  George Kirikos:(as per last call)

  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):I am not sure that IBM or Deloitte are interested in
any changes

  George Kirikos:These are issues.....and some of them seek data from

  George Kirikos:+1 Phil

  Kathy Kleiman:Agree w/ Phil

  Mary Wong:The question about TM+50 that we asked Deloitte was: "How many
TMCH records include a TM+50 list; and how many are on this list on average?
How many registrations were made for entries on the TM+50 list?"

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Mary is in hot question
answering mode

  Phil Marano (Mayer Brown):Deloitte may have useful information about the
relatively high costs and administrative hurdles to recording previously
abused labels. 

  Phil Marano (Mayer Brown):And recommendations for improvement.

  George Kirikos:TM+1000 would be just for Lego. :-)

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Will the abused labels be
included in the SMD file for sunrise?The abused labels will not be included
in the SMD file for sunrise but you will receive claims notification in
relation to these abused labels.

  Mary Wong:@Kristine, that's my understanding

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:It's a direct quote

  Jeff neuman:correct TM plus 50 is only claims, so no sad file

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I would like to respectfully
request that EVERYONE review the public materials on the TMCH website.

  Jeff neuman:sorry SMD

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:So we aren't asking questions
with easy to access information.

  Michael Flemming:Question: As Kathy has pointed out, not only the
trademark +50, but some of the services that Deloitte has introduced are
extensive of what GNSO Policy called for. Some of those services require
more burden upon Registries/Registrars. Is it in our remit to review those
extended services (extended Claims for example)?

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Sorry to only be typing, I
have a horrible connection at home.

  Greg Shatan:Freudian slip, Jeff?

  Mary Wong:@Michael, the TMCH is permitted to offer ancillary services

  George Kirikos:Yes, we can hear you, Steve.

  Jeff neuman:I disagree it would be informed by TM plus 50 as that only
applied where there was a legal case that involved the plus 50

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I can hear STeve

  Jeff neuman:I think expanding the matching rules has nothing to do with TM
plus 50

  Steve Levy:Thanks

  John McElwaine:Did Deloitte ever answer the question on TM +50?

  Mary Wong:@Jeff, yes since TM+50 only goes to Claims so far

  Michael Flemming:I understand that, but are those under review? Like the
extended claims.

  Greg Shatan:Agree that matching rules has nothing to do with TM+50.

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:@ John, the relevent Deloitte
response is in the middle column

  John McElwaine:@Kristine, thanks

  George Kirikos:Philadelphia could be used for .food, but not for .cars

  Jon Nevett:It would be extraordinarily difficult to implement that change

  Mary Wong:If it is helpful, the WG may want to note that the text of this
Question 11 changed considerably during the Sub Team refinement process.

  Greg Shatan:"Generic Trademarks" is an oxymoron and a legally meaningless

  Phil Marano (Mayer Brown):The natural path of expansion would further
complicate implementation of that change

  Kathy Kleiman:How would we structure this inquiry?

  Greg Shatan:George, what if Philadelphia sponsored a race car, or had a
car giveaway promotion?

  Kathy Kleiman:Why wouldn't we ask Deloitte about the costs/benefits of

  Jeff neuman:@kahy - because they would be conflicted. 

  Rebecca L Tushnet:I don't quite understand the idea of the question. Not
that I think we need to ask Deloitte, but what does competition mean?  Who
would have a choice of using one of multiple providers?  Would every
registry have to consult all the possible providers?

  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):is non-competition a technical reason?

  Jeff neuman:@Kathy - I disagree with asking that question as there are no
technical reasons for only one clearinghouse

  George Kirikos:@Greg: they could always register during a non-sunrise

  Greg Shatan:They should be able to register during sunrise.

  George Kirikos:(along with every other prospective user of
philadelphia.cars, e.g. car dealers in that City.

  Jeff neuman:we seem to be in an endless pattern of asking questions
without any path to discuss the policy issues

  Greg Shatan:Anyone can register anything during GA.

  Jeff neuman:or any path for progress

  George Kirikos:@Greg: that would then represent a huge expansion of TM

  George Kirikos:If I had a TM for "cars" in the class of Plectrums, should
I get first dibs on Cars.anything? I think not.

  Greg Shatan:I disagree; that's the way sunrise has worked all along.

  Jeff neuman:a centralized database is separate from having multiple

  George Kirikos:See how the "plectrums" marks were used in past sunrises:

  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):from technical perspective it is not a big deal to
have rules of syncing of two or more databases and to follow it

  Kathy Kleiman:@Mary: and ditto, Cat 4 Q12 for Deloitte and the
verification functions. Tx!

  Mary Wong:@Kathy, can you clarify for verification? Q12 is about the
Database, which is an IBM function. Thanks!

  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):in developing countries price is as important as
lack of eduction

  Jeff neuman:can we compile a list of all the new questions before we send
them on.  I think we need to fully think about what we ask and why and not
burden the community with too many questions

  Jeff neuman:can the leaders of the call please make sure they read the
chat responses.  thanks

  Greg Shatan:Trademark rights cover the same or related goods or goods
within the natural zone of expansion, and this is paired with similarity in
sight sound and meaning, not merely exact match.  I''m happy to discuss
expanding beyond exact match to similarity for RPMs.

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:And we need to make sure the
questions we're asking aren't answered in the FAQ or other easily accessible
online guides.

  Mary Wong:@Jeff, staff will compile all the follow up questions.

  Jeff neuman:is Phil seeing these?

  George Kirikos:A mark for cheese doesn't naturally expand to the category
of cars, though. :-)

  Jeff neuman:Mary, I can't get on for voice, but phil should be reading
some of these

  Greg Shatan:Good point, Christine.

  Mary Wong:@Jeff, any particular comments in chat you want to highight for
the record?

  Jeff neuman:all of the ones about asking further questions

  George Kirikos:Nothing for Deloitte on #16.

  Jeff neuman:I know Kathy has asked for additional questions, but many of
them are answerable without asking them of others or are already answered in

  Mary Wong:@Jeff, I've been reading the chat and will reread after the
call. Can you see the Notes pod? Anything I'm missing in terms of follow up
questions for Deloitte?

  Jeff neuman:I can't on iPad, but perhaps the leader should read the chat
and not rush through the call

  Kathy Kleiman:It would be good if other SGs could weigh in...

  George Kirikos:Did we already get stats from Deloitte on total number of
TM claims notices?

  Jeff neuman:can you please ask the leaders what the next steps are

  George Kirikos:(that would help on #16, if we didn't already get it)

  Mary Wong:@Kathy, we've noted this

  Greg Shatan:Kathy, were these sent to SG/Cs for response? Sorry if I
missed it....

  George Kirikos:Presumably we'd have sunrise data from registry operators
(although registrars might also have TM claims notices data).

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I have an awful connection, so
I'll type.  It might be useful to have some roundtables, perhaps in
Copenhagen, where those who interact with the TMCH can discuss their
experiences in a little detail?  We could hear from willing mark holders,
registrars, and registries. A F2F conversation may spark more information

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:that a survey which is not

  Kathy Kleiman:@Greg, I think Mary sent a query to all SGs.  NCSG didn't
respond either. Perhaps a second chance?

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:@Kathy, my point above
addresses what could be survey fatigue.

  Greg Shatan:I think a follow up and "friendly reminder" is in order....

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I thought we were also
converting to survey monkey to make it easier to respond.

  Greg Shatan:Soon we'll be competing with the behemoth questionnaire about
to issue forth from the SubPro WG....

  Kathy Kleiman:questionnaire fatigue?

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:That is a consideration, Greg.
Why not have a Q&A with people who want to share?

  Greg Shatan:Fatigue? More like shell shock.

  Jeff neuman:my question is what are we as a group going to do with all of
this "data" once collected

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:you get more dimensions that
way...follow up....engagement.

  Mary Wong:@Greg, not these questions specifically as these are the Charter
questions the WG was asked to review (as refined). However, all SO/AC/SG/Cs
were asked for input on the overall Charter as an initial step - and as
required by the GNSO's PDP Manual .

  Kathy Kleiman:@Jeff, the RySG responses are in the document we just
reviewed - and provided useful discussion.  Probably good to have all SGs
responses for similar evaluation...

  Greg Shatan:IPC did comment on the charter way back when, but did not
consider answering the Charter questions to be part of that review and

  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):1.3 actually did not allow registries to test

  Mary Wong:@Kristine, @Greg, from the staff perspective we are aware that
there is a LOT of information requests out there, from surveys to
questionnaires, that are overwhelming the community.

  Jeff neuman:@kathy - you can't force everyone to respond and you can't
keep extending time periods to baby them into responding

  Greg Shatan:Some follow up and reminder is not babying.  

  Kathy Kleiman:Agree with Greg

  Mary Wong:@Greg, I believe we sent out reminders ...

  John McElwaine:What are we doing with the 16 questions that we just went

  Kathy Kleiman:Especially given all of the many requests... 

  Jeff neuman:the NCSG reps in this call should be able to provide the NCSG
perspective just like he IPC reps can and anyone else that did not answer

  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):+1 @Jeff

  Greg Shatan:I will look in the 21000 threads in my ICANN only email box
from the last 18 months. :-)

  Greg Shatan:L'etat c'est moi?

  Jeff neuman:@greg - the IPC response should not be your burden alone to
respond to

  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):any chance of inviting IBM (TMCH) personnel to the

  Mary Wong:@Maxim, I'm told IBM may not be in Copenhagen

Jeff neuman:I feel like we are months behind where we should be

  Jeff neuman:we need some direction to move forward

  Mary Wong:Will do, Phil and Maxim

  Terri Agnew:next call: Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs)
in all gTLDs PDP Working Group is scheduled for Wednesday, 01 March 2017 at
17:00 UTC for 60 minutes.

  George Kirikos:I think the reason for getting the data is so that it
informs the discussion, so that folks don't just stick with their
long-standing positions but are instead swayed by the evidence.

  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Should we invite them, after all IBM has EU division
working with TMCH , so it is not far or costy

  Heather Forrest:To Jeff's point, would it be helpful in CPH to return to
the project timeline just to remind ourselves of where we are in this WG and
what is yet to come?

  George Kirikos:Are we changing the day of the week for this time slot?

  Heather Forrest:Delighted to be here, thank you, and great to see other
APAC members on the call. 

  Michael Flemming:+1, Heather

  Mary Wong:@Heather, the chairs are discussing the agenda for CPH and I
will note your point.

  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Aslo situation where the only technical provider
does not want to show up looks great from perspective of "why only one TMCH"

  Greg Shatan:Say hello to the Tasmanian Devils for me.  Sincerely, Greg

  Vaibhav Aggarwal, NCSG:lets not change time too Much

  Vaibhav Aggarwal, NCSG:it sends the schedule in a tizzy

  Kathy Kleiman:How would folks feel about changing the call forward by one
day... to Wed night/Thurs AM?

  Heather Forrest:Remember also that I am the Council's liaison to this PDP,
so any issues you would like me to raise on the WG's behalf before Council
in CPH, I'm happy to do so

  George Kirikos:*6 to unmute

  David McAuley:very low Jeff

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I hear Jeff

  Mary Wong:I can hear Jeff

  Greg Shatan:That's better

  Michael Flemming:Can hear you

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Agree Jeff

  Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):bye all

  Justine Chew:Cheers.

  Steve Levy:Thanks all

  Heather Forrest:Thanks, everyone - 

  George Kirikos:Bye folks. 

  Kathy Kleiman:Bye. Tx Phil and Mary!

  Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Thanks all, g'night.

  Heather Forrest:good night to everyone on the other side of the world

  Greg Shatan:Good night moon

  David McAuley:Thanks all, good night

  Vaibhav Aggarwal, NCSG:Bye Bye

  John McElwaine:Bye



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170222/bcfd4f6a/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: attendance RPM 22 February 2017.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 331718 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170222/bcfd4f6a/attendanceRPM22February2017-0001.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5018 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170222/bcfd4f6a/smime-0001.p7s>

More information about the gnso-rpm-wg mailing list