[GNSO-RPM-WG] Q#8

[claudio di gangi]

Kathy, all,

Last week, we spent the first full hour of the call discussing the first
Question 8 proposal, and zero minutes on the second proposal on Question #8
(In comparison we spent much time discussing both proposals for question
#7).

I am aware that some members spoke in support of the first proposal (I was
on audio only), but do not know how many, while some others did not speak
in support, and that we agreed to spend this full week to solicit WG
members views on the list before moving forward. This week has not yet
concluded (we have through today), yet new language is being posted below
now for consideration.

A few additional points, the week prior Phil conducted an informal poll
using the Zoom room functionality, which helped provide transparency on WG
members views for consensus building, which was not done last week on
Question #8.

Nor has there been an effort to bring the various proponents together to
reach a compromise position, which we recently did in the sprint of the
consensus-building process on Question #7, the design mark topic. So I’m
not sure why question #8 is being treated so differently in all these
various ways (as described above) compared to Question #7.

Can someone kindly shed some light on this disparity in treatment between
the way we are approaching question 7 and question 8?

Thanks!

Best regards,
Claudio



On Tuesday, September 17, 2019, Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com>
wrote:

> All,
>
> Last week we found considerable overlap and common ground on Q#8.  I
> promised to circulate language sharing that agreement and slightly refining
> existing proposals.
>
> Q#8:
>
> 3.2 The standards for inclusion in the Clearinghouse are:
>
> 3.2.1 Nationally or regionally registered word marks from all
> jurisdictions.
>
> 3.2.2 Any word mark that has been validated through a court of law or
> other judicial proceeding.
>
> 3.2.3 Any word marks specified in and protected by a statute or treaty *as
> trademarks *[1] in effect at the time the mark is submitted to the
> Clearinghouse for inclusion.
>
> 3.2.4 Other marks that constitute intellectual property.  [see below]
>
> 3.2.5 Protections afforded to trademark registrations do not extend to
> applications for registrations, marks.
>
> [1]
> *By "trademarks," the WG means "trademarks, service marks, certification
> marks and collective marks." *
>
> For purposes of clarity, separate or ancillary databases of the Trademark
> Clearinghouse Provider (or another provider) may include other marks, but
> those databases should not be used for Sunrise or Trademark Claims Notices
> under the RPMs. Registries may use those separate or ancillary databases to
> provide additional services but are not required to do so under the RPMs.
>
> (Appropriate corresponding changes will be percolated across the *
> Trademark Clearinghouse* Applicant Guidebook)
>
> -----------------
>
> Best, Kathy
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20190917/ffbbbea7/attachment.html>