[gnso-rpm-wg] FOR INFORMATION: Letter from trademark scholars and information on Deloitte Ancillary Services

Tue Mar 28 18:48:26 UTC 2017

O please.  If I wrote the letter you all should not care a whit.  If EFF
and other scholars (all listed) wrote the letter, I ask that we all stand
up and read it.

On 3/28/17, 6:39 PM, "Kiran Malancharuvil"
<Kiran.Malancharuvil at markmonitor.com> wrote:

>With respect Paul, even if I agreed with that characterization, no one is
>"heavier" than anyone else at ICANN.
>
>Kiran Malancharuvil
>Policy Counselor
>MarkMonitor
>415-419-9138 (m) 
>
>Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos.
>
>> On Mar 28, 2017, at 10:36 AM, Paul Keating <Paul at law.es> wrote:
>> 
>> Well it was written but some relatively heavies in the legal field.
>> 
>> On 3/28/17, 4:42 PM, "Kiran Malancharuvil via gnso-rpm-wg"
>> <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org on behalf of gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>
>>wrote:
>> 
>>> Many of the signatories aren't members of the working group. When
>>> input/comment is received by an ICANN working group by outside parties,
>>> the working group often invites those people to attend a meeting to
>>> facilitate the discussion so that there can be meaningful dialogue and
>>>a
>>> better common understanding of the issues raised.
>>> 
>>> There is a prescribed time in the icann policy development process for
>>> solicitation of comments, as well as review and consideration of public
>>> comment. My question (for staff, to be clear) is why we are considering
>>> this public comment out of turn. Why does it have elevated importance?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Kiran 
>>> 
>>> Kiran Malancharuvil
>>> Policy Counselor
>>> MarkMonitor
>>> 415-419-9138 (m)
>>> 
>>> Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos.
>>> 
>>>> On Mar 28, 2017, at 8:33 AM, Rebecca Tushnet
>>>> <Rebecca.Tushnet at law.georgetown.edu> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> (1) Yes. (2) Invited by whom? (3) It's my understanding that all
>>>> comments should be considered; are you aware of any we're ignoring?
>>>> Rebecca Tushnet
>>>> Georgetown Law
>>>> 703 593 6759
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Kiran Malancharuvil via gnso-rpm-wg
>>>> <gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org> wrote:
>>>>> Agree with Jeff.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Also, are these "trademark scholars" represented in the group? Are
>>>>> they invited in for discussion? Why is this letter any more important
>>>>> than any other public comment?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Kiran
>>>>> 
>>>>> Kiran Malancharuvil
>>>>> Policy Counselor
>>>>> MarkMonitor
>>>>> 415-419-9138 (m)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Mar 28, 2017, at 7:54 AM, Jeff Neuman
>>>>> <jeff.neuman at comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks Mary.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Co-Chairs,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Can I assume that with respect to the EFF letter, the only items we
>>>>> would be discussing from that letter at this point are their comments
>>>>> with respect to design marks and the transparency of the TMCH
>>>>>database?
>>>>> 
>>>>> I am not saying the other comments are not important, but with
>>>>>respect
>>>>> to this Working Group at this time, we are not yet addressing those
>>>>> other issues.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I would strongly urge that we not engage yet in the other discussion
>>>>> around the other comments at this point (namely, trademark rights in
>>>>> general), as I think that could lead us down a large rabbit hole and
>>>>> considerably slow down out work.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Jeffrey J. Neuman
>>>>> Senior Vice President |Valideus USA | Com Laude USA
>>>>> 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600
>>>>> Mclean, VA 22102, United States
>>>>> E: jeff.neuman at valideus.com<mailto:jeff.neuman at valideus.com> or
>>>>> jeff.neuman at comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>
>>>>> T: +1.703.635.7514
>>>>> M: +1.202.549.5079
>>>>> @Jintlaw
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> From: 
>>>>> gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org>
>>>>> [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 6:15 AM
>>>>> To: gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>
>>>>> Subject: [gnso-rpm-wg] FOR INFORMATION: Letter from trademark
>>>>>scholars
>>>>> and information on Deloitte Ancillary Services
>>>>> 
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> During the ICANN58 Working Group sessions in Copenhagen, the
>>>>>following
>>>>> two matters came up for which staff is now following up with the
>>>>> requested document (for #1) and information (for #2).
>>>>> 
>>>>> Item #1: Letter of 10 March 2017 from some trademark scholars and
>>>>> practitioners to our Working Group co-chairs expressing concerns with
>>>>> certain aspects of the TMCH:
>>>>> 
>>>>>https://www.eff.org/files/2017/03/10/tm_scholars_letter_to_icann_final
>>>>>.p
>>>>> df.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Item #2: Question regarding the Ancillary Services that Deloitte is
>>>>> permitted to provide under its Validation Agreement with ICANN,
>>>>>subject
>>>>> to ICANN's authorization.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Currently, two Ancillary Services have been approved by ICANN:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 1.       Extended Claims Services
>>>>> The extended claims services provide the Trademark Holder or
>>>>>Trademark
>>>>> Agent, as applicable, with an electronic notification when a domain
>>>>> name registered in an Eligible TLD matches one or more of such
>>>>>party's
>>>>> recorded labels with the TMCH.  The extended claims services does not
>>>>> include a domain name pre-registration notification (i.e. a
>>>>> notification to the potential registrant of a domain name that the
>>>>> domain name such registrant intends to register matches a label
>>>>> recorded with the Trademark Clearinghouse).
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 2.       Audit Report
>>>>> Deloitte may offer an audit report service for Trademark Holders and
>>>>> Trademark Agents with active Trademark Records recorded in the
>>>>> Trademark Clearinghouse.  Such audit reports shall consist primarily
>>>>>of
>>>>> a listing of matches between their recorded labels within the
>>>>>Trademark
>>>>> Clearinghouse and domain names registered in an Eligible TLD.
>>>>> 
>>>>> FYI, Deloitte's contract with ICANN is for an initial period expiring
>>>>> on the fifth anniversary of ICANN's entry into a Registry Agreement
>>>>> under the New gTLD Program, with consecutive one-year renewals
>>>>> thereafter. Although Deloitte currently serves as the sole TMCH
>>>>> validator, ICANN may appoint additional validators once ten Qualified
>>>>> Sunrise Periods have been completed under the New gTLD Program.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks and cheers
>>>>> Mary
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
>>>>> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>
>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
>>>>> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
>>> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
>> 
>> 