<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle25
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I would also add that if discriminatory pricing/premium names/reserved names schemes result in a trademark owner being effectively prohibited from exercising
their rights as recognized by existing sunrise policies, that is a circumvention of rights. It may also be an incentive to infringe when brand names are offered to brands at a prohibitive cost and for non-brand-associated registrants for free.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Kiran<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Lori Schulman<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, September 23, 2016 1:51 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Rebecca Tushnet <rlt26@law.georgetown.edu>; gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] TMCH review objectives<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">As Jeff pointed out, it’s not a question of keeping prices low or high, it’s about discriminatory pricing based on whether a national right is granted in a name. I agree
with you that the right is separate from the pricing but when the prices are manipulated based on an exercise of a right it becomes a concern. There is a built in deterrent to using the TMCH based on a right when that use then leads to extraordinary pricing.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#595959">Lori S. Schulman<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#595959">Senior Director, Internet Policy<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#595959">International Trademark Association (INTA)<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#595959">+1-202-704-0408, Skype: lsschulman<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Rebecca Tushnet [<a href="mailto:rlt26@law.georgetown.edu">mailto:rlt26@law.georgetown.edu</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, September 23, 2016 4:42 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Kiran Malancharuvil <<a href="mailto:Kiran.Malancharuvil@markmonitor.com">Kiran.Malancharuvil@markmonitor.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Lori Schulman <<a href="mailto:lschulman@inta.org">lschulman@inta.org</a>>; Jeff Neuman <<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a>>;
<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [gnso-rpm-wg] TMCH review objectives<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I’m not sure what you’re saying. I am asking why keeping prices low (but maybe not too low, given other comments) is a concern of the
TMCH review, and asking for a reason related to the legal rights, as opposed to market interests, of trademark owners. If such a reason isn’t persuasively articulated, then I think that would give us an answer.</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Rebecca Tushnet<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Georgetown Law<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">703 593 6759<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif"> Kiran Malancharuvil [<a href="mailto:Kiran.Malancharuvil@markmonitor.com">mailto:Kiran.Malancharuvil@markmonitor.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, September 23, 2016 4:37 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Rebecca Tushnet<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Lori Schulman; Jeff Neuman; <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [gnso-rpm-wg] TMCH review objectives<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I think it would probably be a mistake then, to try and exclude the issue from the discussion, if you wish to discuss it.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><br>
Kiran<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Rebecca Tushnet [<a href="mailto:rlt26@law.georgetown.edu">mailto:rlt26@law.georgetown.edu</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, September 23, 2016 1:35 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Kiran Malancharuvil <<a href="mailto:Kiran.Malancharuvil@markmonitor.com">Kiran.Malancharuvil@markmonitor.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Lori Schulman <<a href="mailto:lschulman@inta.org">lschulman@inta.org</a>>; Jeff Neuman <<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a>>;
<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] TMCH review objectives<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I would then like that understanding of the law to be articulated, because I don't see it. <br>
<br>
Rebecca Tushnet <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Georgetown Law<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Sent from my phone. Apologies for terseness/typos. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
On Sep 23, 2016, at 4:29 PM, Kiran Malancharuvil <<a href="mailto:Kiran.Malancharuvil@markmonitor.com">Kiran.Malancharuvil@markmonitor.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Hi Rebecca,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I think it’s fair to say that the trademark community (through INTA and elsewhere) is basing their concerns on a full understanding of the law.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Thanks,<br>
<br>
Kiran</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:#1F497D">Kiran Malancharuvil</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Policy Counselor</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">MarkMonitor</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">415.222.8318 (t)</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">415.419.9138 (m)</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><a href="http://www.markmonitor.com/"><span style="color:#0563C1">www.markmonitor.com</span></a>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Rebecca Tushnet [<a href="mailto:rlt26@law.georgetown.edu">mailto:rlt26@law.georgetown.edu</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, September 23, 2016 1:26 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Lori Schulman <<a href="mailto:lschulman@inta.org">lschulman@inta.org</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Kiran Malancharuvil <<a href="mailto:Kiran.Malancharuvil@markmonitor.com">Kiran.Malancharuvil@markmonitor.com</a>>; Jeff Neuman <<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a>>;
<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] TMCH review objectives</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">To reiterate and then I will try to stop: "deep concern" and "related to a right granted by national law" are very different things. <br>
<br>
Rebecca Tushnet <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Georgetown Law<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Sent from my phone. Apologies for terseness/typos. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
On Sep 23, 2016, at 4:17 PM, Lori Schulman <<a href="mailto:lschulman@inta.org">lschulman@inta.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">I also agree with Brad and Jeff. This pricing issue is a deep concern for INTA members.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#595959">Lori S. Schulman</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#595959">Senior Director, Internet Policy</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#595959">International Trademark Association (INTA)</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#595959">+1-202-704-0408, Skype: lsschulman</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a> [<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org">mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Kiran Malancharuvil via gnso-rpm-wg<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, September 23, 2016 3:31 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Jeff Neuman <<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] TMCH review objectives</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Agree with Jeff and Bradley below.<br>
<br>
Kiran Malancharuvil<br>
Policy Counselor<br>
MarkMonitor<br>
415-419-9138 (m)<br>
<br>
Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos.<br>
<br>
On Sep 23, 2016, at 10:00 AM, Jeff Neuman <<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a><<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com%3e%3e">mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>></a> wrote:<br>
<br>
We also need to look at examples out there where it is not just premium pricing of domains, but there was at least one case (.feedback) that said if you are a trademark owner (whether or not purchased in the Sunrise or after), the price is $X, but if you are
not the trademark owner, then your price is $Y, where $Y was thousands of dollars less.<br>
<br>
See: <a href="http://domainincite.com/19560-forget-sucks-feedback-will-drive-trademark-owners-nuts-all-over-again">
http://domainincite.com/19560-forget-sucks-feedback-will-drive-trademark-owners-nuts-all-over-again</a> and<br>
<a href="http://domainincite.com/19615-feedback-regs-fox-trademark-to-itself-during-sunrise">http://domainincite.com/19615-feedback-regs-fox-trademark-to-itself-during-sunrise</a><br>
<br>
I believe the policies of .sucks and .feedback need to be discussed. It is one thing to have premium pricing on a name whereby any purchaser of the name would have to pay the same price (even if high); but, it is another thing to have different prices for a
name depending on who the purchaser is (discrimination amongst purchasers). That I do believe is in our scope.<br>
<br>
Jeffrey J. Neuman<br>
Senior Vice President |Valideus USA | Com Laude USA<br>
1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600<br>
Mclean, VA 22102, United States<br>
E: <a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com">jeff.neuman@valideus.com</a><<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com%3e">mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com></a> or
<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a><<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com%3e">mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com></a><br>
T: +1.703.635.7514<br>
M: +1.202.549.5079<br>
@Jintlaw<br>
<br>
<br>
From: <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a><<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org%3e">mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org></a> [<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org">mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>]
On Behalf Of Phil Corwin<br>
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 12:20 PM<br>
To: Rebecca Tushnet <<a href="mailto:rlt26@law.georgetown.edu">rlt26@law.georgetown.edu</a><<a href="mailto:rlt26@law.georgetown.edu%3e%3e">mailto:rlt26@law.georgetown.edu>></a><br>
Cc: <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org%3e">mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org></a><br>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] TMCH review objectives<br>
<br>
“If post-Sunrise registrations of expensive domain names have led to infringement, I hope we will be able to collect evidence of that.”<br>
<br>
Agreed that we should seek this type of data, certainly anecdotal and more comprehensive if available.<br>
<br>
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal<br>
Virtualaw LLC<br>
1155 F Street, NW<br>
Suite 1050<br>
Washington, DC 20004<br>
202-559-8597/Direct<br>
202-559-8750/Fax<br>
202-255-6172/Cell<br>
<br>
Twitter: @VlawDC<br>
<br>
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey<br>
<br>
From: Rebecca Tushnet [<a href="mailto:rlt26@law.georgetown.edu">mailto:rlt26@law.georgetown.edu</a>]<br>
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 12:16 PM<br>
To: Phil Corwin<br>
Cc: Silver, Bradley; <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org%3e">mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org></a><br>
Subject: Re: TMCH review objectives<br>
<br>
And is the additional system cost (one component of effectiveness) of individualized review of pricing worth this hypothetical increased risk of later infringement? If post-Sunrise registrations of expensive domain names have led to infringement, I hope we
will be able to collect evidence of that. Likewise with the hypothetical effect of encountering an unregistered domain in a new gTLD. In an age of search engines, I thought we had gotten past the idea that a consumer would type in a domain name and then give
up if no website, or a nonconfusing but non-trademark owner website, resolves. I also highly doubt there's evidence that consumers think less of a trademark owner for not registering every variation.<br>
<br>
Rebecca Tushnet<br>
Georgetown Law<br>
<br>
Sent from my phone. Apologies for terseness/typos.<br>
<br>
On Sep 23, 2016, at 11:39 AM, Phil Corwin <<a href="mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com">psc@vlaw-dc.com</a><<a href="mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com%3e%3e">mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com>></a> wrote:<br>
I believe I just addressed that question in the email I posted – if unreasonably high sunrise pricing deters a rights holder from registering a domain corresponding to a verified TM registered in the TMCH then it may be registered in the general availability
period by an infringer, which in turn imposes a variety of costs on the TM owner (including those of bringing a subsequent URS, UDRP, or judicial action) and also creates the possibility of confusion and harm for the general public.<br>
<br>
This is not to say that all Premium pricing is unreasonable, as it is generally recognized that certain words and terms have inherent additional value in the DNS context – it really requires a case by case analysis.<br>
<br>
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal<br>
Virtualaw LLC<br>
1155 F Street, NW<br>
Suite 1050<br>
Washington, DC 20004<br>
202-559-8597/Direct<br>
202-559-8750/Fax<br>
202-255-6172/Cell<br>
<br>
Twitter: @VlawDC<br>
<br>
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey<br>
<br>
From: <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a><<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org%3e">mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org></a> [<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org">mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>]
On Behalf Of Rebecca Tushnet<br>
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 11:10 AM<br>
To: Silver, Bradley; <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org%3e">mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org></a><br>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] TMCH review objectives<br>
<br>
TMCH’s goal of “protection” against what, though? How does high pricing contribute to trademark infringement? High pricing may deter purchases of domain names, no doubt, but with what result for the system overall?<br>
<br>
Rebecca Tushnet<br>
Georgetown Law<br>
703 593 6759<br>
<br>
From: Silver, Bradley [<a href="mailto:Bradley.Silver@timewarner.com">mailto:Bradley.Silver@timewarner.com</a>]<br>
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 11:00 AM<br>
To: Rebecca Tushnet; <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org%3e">mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org></a><br>
Subject: RE: TMCH review objectives<br>
<br>
I would add that the question of pricing feeds into the concept of effectiveness, because if the TMCH is serving as a database for registries to target brand owners for higher pricing based on the value of their brands, then this is antithetical to the TMCH’s
primary goal to provide protection for verified right holders.<br>
<br>
From: <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a><<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org%3e">mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org></a> [<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org">mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>]
On Behalf Of Rebecca Tushnet<br>
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 10:26 AM<br>
To: <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org%3e">mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org></a><br>
Subject: [gnso-rpm-wg] TMCH review objectives<br>
<br>
Hello, all. On the last WG call, concerns about pricing of domain names during the Sunrise Period arose. This led to a question of whether pricing is within the remit of this WG – and the broader question of what the purpose of our TMCH review is. There seemed
to be a desire to focus on the TMCH’s effectiveness. The predicate question, then, is: effectiveness at what? Here are some suggestions for discussion: (1) minimizing the cost of operating the system for all concerned; (2) minimizing the number of actions
that ultimately need to be brought against infringing registrants; (3) minimizing the number of noninfringing registrants whose legitimate uses are blocked or deterred. If the system is reasonably balancing those objectives, I suggest, then it is effective;
potential changes should be directly related to improving performance on one or more of these metrics without unduly hampering the others.<br>
<br>
Yours,<br>
Rebecca Tushnet<br>
<br>
Rebecca Tushnet<br>
Georgetown Law<br>
703 593 6759<br>
<br>
=================================================================<br>
Reminder: Any email that requests your login credentials or that asks you to click on a link could be a phishing attack. If you have any questions regarding the authenticity of this email or its sender, please contact the IT Service Desk at 212.484.6000 or
via email at <a href="mailto:ITServices@timewarner.com">ITServices@timewarner.com</a><<a href="mailto:ITServices@timewarner.com%3e">mailto:ITServices@timewarner.com></a><br>
<br>
=================================================================<br>
<br>
=================================================================<br>
This message is the property of Time Warner Inc. and is intended only for the use of the<br>
addressee(s) and may be legally privileged and/or confidential. If the reader of this message<br>
is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended<br>
recipient, he or she is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, printing, forwarding,<br>
or any method of copying of this information, and/or the taking of any action in reliance on<br>
the information herein is strictly prohibited except by the intended recipient or those to whom<br>
he or she intentionally distributes this message. If you have received this communication in<br>
error, please immediately notify the sender, and delete the original message and any copies<br>
from your computer or storage system. Thank you.<br>
=================================================================<br>
<br>
________________________________<br>
No virus found in this message.<br>
Checked by AVG - <a href="http://www.avg.com">www.avg.com</a><<a href="http://www.avg.com%3e">http://www.avg.com></a><br>
Version: 2016.0.7797 / Virus Database: 4656/13069 - Release Date: 09/23/16<br>
________________________________<br>
No virus found in this message.<br>
Checked by AVG - <a href="http://www.avg.com">www.avg.com</a><<a href="http://www.avg.com%3e">http://www.avg.com></a><br>
Version: 2016.0.7797 / Virus Database: 4656/13069 - Release Date: 09/23/16<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org%3e">mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org></a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">_______________________________________________<br>
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</body>
</html>