[gnso-rpm-wg] Recordings, Attendance, and AC Chat for Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) PDP Working Group call on Wednesday, 20 September 2017 17:00 UTC
julie.bisland at icann.org
Wed Sep 20 22:27:42 UTC 2017
Please find the attendance of the call attached to this email, and the MP3, Adobe Connect recording and Adobe Connect chat below for the Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) PDP Working Group call held Wednesday, 20 September 2017 at 17:00 UTC.
Attendance of the call is posted on agenda wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/TC0hB
Adobe Connect recording: https://participate.icann.org/p4e3e2ozkw3/<https://participate.icann.org/p4e3e2ozkw3/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=96c8662b94871fccf55d58833d3c9ea8813255262baec5df38f242b37e427b7b>
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/
Adobe Connect chat transcript for 20 September 2017:
Julie Bisland:Welcome to the Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) in all gTLDs PDP Working Group on Wednesday, 20 September 2017 at 17:00 UTC.
Julie Bisland:Agenda wiki page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_TC0hB&d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=QiF-05YzARosRvTYd84AB_UYInlydmFcjNmBM5XgySw&m=_jAASipIPlbCLn1TtYdBK1DgiIxZwDyqpTFR-U16P6k&s=9AFhnyIpATSQZDBTOaXE5oUH5GKsXkB8zp1A3VDDty0&e=
Julie Bisland:We would like to introduce Andrea Glandon - SO/AC Collaboration Services Coordinator (she is taking over Chantelle Doerksen's duties while on leave)
George Kirikos:Hi folks.
George Kirikos:Welcome, Andrea.
Andrea Glandon:Thank you!
Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Hello All
Paul Tattersfield:Hello everyone
George Kirikos:It might be wise to blast out an email reminder, i.e. a 2 minute warning.
Amr Elsadr:Julie already sent one, George. :)
George Kirikos:Strange, as it didn't show up in my mailbox yet (usually it's fast).
Paul Tattersfield:I had one 4 minutes before the hour George
Paul McGrady:Dialing in now
David McAuley:sorry to be late
Paul McGrady:On the phone!
Mary Wong:The GNSO Council meeting is audiocast live for non-Councilors to listen in. The link to the audiocast as well as the agenda for this meeting, and documents, can be found here: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_meetings_agenda-2Dcouncil-2D20sep17-2Den.htm&d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=QiF-05YzARosRvTYd84AB_UYInlydmFcjNmBM5XgySw&m=_jAASipIPlbCLn1TtYdBK1DgiIxZwDyqpTFR-U16P6k&s=oZS1ZwxvfS_YSzc0ULXKwSdVeZLLBX7kBzzw0lV2nwk&e=
George Kirikos:Noise on line?
Mary Wong:Paul is breaking up for us
Mary Wong:I can explain he preamble while we wait
Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):voice is still jittered
George Kirikos:https://domainnamewire.com/2016/12/15/donuts-acquires-irish-top-level-domain-name/ (Donuts acquired .IRISH)
J. Scott Evans:Wouldn't it simply be a matter of looking at the registries that offered a DPML and how many sunrise registrations were sold in those registries as compared to those who had no DPML service?
George Kirikos:@JScott: One would have to collect the data carefully, e.g. .IRISH *now* is probably covered by Donuts DPML, but didn't have it at launch.
George Kirikos:Also, if we're going to assess the "extent" (quantitative), if there are 5000 DPML marks in 2017, that might overstate the impact of sunrises in 2014, if 2014 only had 100 DPML registrations, for example.
susan payne:@Paul - yes, I agree
J. Scott Evans:@george. If that is the case, then I don't think it is relavent to sunrise. It might be for URS or UDRP
Mary Wong:Staff has collected data on the dates of the various Sunrise periods across all new gTLDs that have launched - perhaps those can be matched to whether they were operated (at the time of Sunrise) by the three ROs that we know offer DPML and similar services?
George Kirikos:Right, Mary.
J. Scott Evans:I have no idea why this a question and how it effects our looking at the efficacy of the current RPMs.
George Kirikos:@JScott: as a "first pass", one can do stats like "Those with DPML had 100 sunrises, on average, vs. those without DPML had 200" (as made up numbers), but that would have many missing variables.
George Kirikos:(e.g. the strings covered by DPML might be very different than those not covered by DPML, on average)
Marie Pattullo:But either would show that brand holders do need and use the RPMs.
Jon Nevett (Donuts):assume that the expknatory note won't be included when the questionaire goes out?
George Kirikos:Perhaps it's a "benefit" of the TMCH?
Philip Corwin:@Jon--I believe you are correct
Jon Nevett (Donuts):Thanks Phil
Mary Wong:If it will help, the TMCH Functional Specifications explains how registry operators access the TMCH database.
George Kirikos:Although, maybe it's also a way to look at whether the TMCH is competitively priced, etc. (maybe they use alternatives?)
Mary Wong:In addition, the Terms & Conditions spelling the scope of Registries' and Registrars' ability to access the TMCH Database can be found here: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__marksdb.org_tmdb_public_tandc&d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=QiF-05YzARosRvTYd84AB_UYInlydmFcjNmBM5XgySw&m=_jAASipIPlbCLn1TtYdBK1DgiIxZwDyqpTFR-U16P6k&s=2FFHBvoOrLo9fin8YAvVTDixIpNAdhnkZJiTGJW3lWs&e=
susan payne:@Jon - but these questions are not a questionaire to go to others so much as the questions we think this WG should be considering. They may give rise to questions we ask others
Poncelet Ileleji:Am fine
Paul Tattersfield:@ Susan good to hear because it depends who you ask some commentators are highly unlikely to be objective or provide straightforward answers
Jon Nevett (Donuts):ok -- thanks Susan
George Kirikos:Here's the DPML Plus description: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__donuts.domains_what-2Dwe-2Ddo_brand-2Dprotection_&d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=QiF-05YzARosRvTYd84AB_UYInlydmFcjNmBM5XgySw&m=_jAASipIPlbCLn1TtYdBK1DgiIxZwDyqpTFR-U16P6k&s=0UrXDPISebkJNmUYgicM_UZ_7Tcj4mnWILN2a_DgDzU&e=
Mary Wong:@Paul, that is correct - the Sub Team focused on exact matches only.
Jon Nevett (Donuts):#5 is for Claims, no?
George Kirikos:(it covered typos, etc. --- might give insight into Greg's expanded match proposal)
George Kirikos:They are aware --- due to misspellings.
Jon Nevett (Donuts):correct Phil
George Kirikos:"more than three "contains" or misspelled strings can be added for an additional fee"
J. Scott Evans:Question 5 deals with Claim services. Question 4 deals with DPML and speaks to the fact that there were variants of the DPMLs.
susan payne:I have to leave the Adobe room now I'm afraid but will rejoin on phone
George Kirikos:Are all these additional RPMs going through ICANN's RSEP system?
George Kirikos:(or are some, but not all?)
Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):anything now goes via RSEP
Mary Wong:No comment from staff, we agree with Phll
George Kirikos:Is it mandatory, though? Or can they offer it without going through RSEP?
Jon Nevett (Donuts):sure
Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):it is a coinsidence that 100% of requests for any change to services go via RSEP
Jon Nevett (Donuts):i'm fine with it as is -- thx
Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:@ GEorge, there is no list of things that must have an RSEP. It's case by case.
J. Scott Evans:I have a question for the Registry Operator representatives on the call. What is the likelihood that registries will respond to us?
George Kirikos:Thanks, Kristine. That's what I thought, that it might be vague. Perhaps that's something that should be a "question"?
George Kirikos:i.e.did your RPM go through RSEP? (as a data collection task)
Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:@George, because reviewing additional RPMs themselves is not in scope, we declined to include such questions. ICANN has a separate group working on RSEPs
Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:@George, we're seeking data to inform sunrise
Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:research
Mary Wong:@Kathy, what would be the question for the non-trademark-owning general public?
George Kirikos:Thanks, Kristine. It's a maze of PDPs! :-)
Kathy Kleiman:@Mary, for tradeemark-owner general public
Mary Wong:@Kathy, thanks
Kathy Kleiman:tx you!
George Kirikos:Volume is a bit low for Greg?
Mary Wong:@Kathy, maybe others on the call can elaborate - but I am not sure that a TM owner will know that they were blocked because another TM owner used a blocking service for a different class of goods or services. They will just know they can't register, right?
George Kirikos:@Mary: yes, it's very difficult, because there's no "standard' across all registries as to how those blocked names appear in WHOIS, afaik.
Mary Wong:@George, so what question will we be asking these blocked TM onwers?
Kathy Kleiman:Apple Records :-)
George Kirikos:@Mary: is it a question for the TM owners? Or the registry operators? Or both?
Mary Wong:@George, Kathy suggesed we also ask the TM owners who were blocked.
George Kirikos:Do registrars get any input? (e.g. do these registry-operated blocking lists reduce the offerings of sunrises offered through registrars?)
Kathy Kleiman:@Mary, I think I would rephrase: we also ask the TM owners if they have been blocked...
Michael R Graham:@Kathy -- Apple
Michael R Graham:@Kathy -- Apple (Records) owned by Apple (Computers) now.
Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):since those RPMs passed RSEP - they did not rise "significant Security or Stability issues or (ii) could raise significant competition issues" - according to the ICANN process (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resources_pages_registries_rsep_policy-2Den&d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=QiF-05YzARosRvTYd84AB_UYInlydmFcjNmBM5XgySw&m=_jAASipIPlbCLn1TtYdBK1DgiIxZwDyqpTFR-U16P6k&s=5abyCc63ExXYpYwjaRnCVmpmTEvQsbRl1IIVIZgTNs4&e= )
George Kirikos:Some of the visible rules will only show the *current* rules, not the historical ones.
George Kirikos:(they've been evolving over time, etc.)
J. Scott Evans:@Susan. It makes perfect sense to me.
Michael R Graham:Apologies, but I will have to drop off in 15.
Paul Tattersfield:if it becomes mandated does it effect their competitive edge?
George Kirikos:I think Donuts has (or has applied for) some patents in relation to their offerings?
Paul Tattersfield:Phil +1
George Kirikos:That might affect whether they could ever be "mandated" by ICANN, if it violates a patent.
George Kirikos:I think Claudio is referencing this: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2017-August/002341.html
David McAuley:That sounds quite helpful, thanks Mary and staff
Mary Wong:We are trying our best to get that done quickly while being accurate :)
Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:@George, I think the data about "do blocked domains affect domains available for registration in Sunrise or GA" is the same, right? The subsequent question is "who was blocked"?
Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:But the RO wouldn't really know if a registrant didn't get the domain name they wanted....
Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:+1 Paul
Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):+1 Kristine, sometimes even Registrars did not know that
George Kirikos:Sure, that would be fine, Kathy.
Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Agree wholeheartedly with Susan.
George Kirikos:A review looks at the costs *and* benefits, including the costs imposed on others (e.g. prospective registrants).
bradley silver:+1 Susan
George Kirikos:If Susan's concern is correct, do we trash this entire document?
Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:But George, we are NOT reviewing additional RPMs
Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:That is not our mandate.
Jeff Neuman:@George - but it is a review of the ICANN-mandated RPMs....not all RPMs
Paul McGrady:+1 Susan.
John McElwaine:Agree with Susan. We need stay within our charter.
Jon Nevett (Donuts):Agree with Susan -- also, Just for the record -- blocking services don't impact the ability for someone else to register a name any more than does an actual registration.
Marie Pattullo:Agree with Susan as well.
Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:@George, we're asking for some voluntary data to help our RPMs review.
Marie Pattullo:Thanks Jon, good point.
Cyntia King:10 secs......4
Greg Shatan:Lori Schulman from INTA is not on this call.
Mary Wong:@Phil, @George, we do not have any information on that point. Nielsen is a contractor to INTA so the question should be for INTA to answer.
Mary Wong:@George, can you remind us what the questions were and the WG agreement to send the questions to Nielsen?
Julie Bisland:The next Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) in all gTLDs PDP Working Group is scheduled for Thursday, 28 September 2017 at 03:00 UTC for 90 minute duration.
George Kirikos:@Mary: they were sent to the mailing list.
Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):3AM ... is it possible to make 5AM?
George Kirikos:@Mary: See: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2017-August/002427.html
George Kirikos:That was August 31st, at Mary's invitation.
Mary Wong:@George, was there agreeemnt to send them to Nielsen?
Mary Wong:I ask because I don't recall that as a staff action item, so apologies if I missed it.
Sara Bockey:on thursday or tuesday at 3UTC??
Kathy Kleiman:@Maxim, probably not before this coming Wed.
George Kirikos:Here was Claudio's email: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2017-September/002505.html
Kathy Kleiman:But perhaps Mary could add your require to our co-charis list of issues and concerns...
Sara Bockey:it's on my calendar for the 26th, not the 28th
Mary Wong:@Sara, it would be Thursday at 0300 UTC. Thats the normal rotation for every 4th call.
Sara Bockey:OK, thanks!
George Kirikos:Bye folks.
Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):bye all
David McAuley:thanks all, good bye
Louise Marie Hurel:bye all
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Attendance RPM Member 20 Sept.pdf
Size: 338687 bytes
Desc: Attendance RPM Member 20 Sept.pdf
More information about the gnso-rpm-wg