<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><div>Personally I have yet to hear a valid reason for having the database closed:</div><div><br></div><div>1.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>All underlying trademarks are public record</div><div>2.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>All TMCH registrants have the right to secure the relevant domain names during sunrise (or simply freeze them per Donuts)</div><div>3.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The TMCH has a notice provision should # 2 not be selected but the mark holder or the domain is an “equal” to the TMCH entry</div><div>4.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The URS exists</div><div>5.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The UDRP exists</div><div>6.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The Courts exist.</div><div><br></div><div>The only concern I have heard is that cybersquatters may register the actual mark or around the mark. This is not a real issue:</div><div><br></div><div>A.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The mark holder can register</div><div>B.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The mark holder can exclude (via Donuts)</div><div>C.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The mark holder can issue a notice</div><div>D.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The mark holder can use the URS</div><div>E.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The mark holder can use the UDRP</div><div>F.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The mark holder can use the judicial system</div><div><br></div><div>HOWEVER, on the flip side, we keep hearing about all of these TMCH entries that would cause your grandmother to roll in her grave. This COULD be perceived as an attempt by the mark holders to keep quiet about THEIR land grab based on claims that are entirely generic (JSCOTT – sorry) and have no business being included in a preemptive preclusion that if used against our own personal interests would be deemed offensive.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>SHOW ME THE LIST (drain the swamp), however you want to say it. Get it out in the open. Look at it. If there is no issue then ignore it. The more you try to keep something hidden the more people want to see it – distrusting the reasons for keeping it hidden in the first place.</div><div><br></div><div>My 2C.</div><div><br></div><div>Paul Keating</div><div><br></div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><div style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:11pt; text-align:left; color:black; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt"><span style="font-weight:bold">From: </span> <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of Greg Shatan <<a href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com">gregshatanipc@gmail.com</a>><br><span style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span> Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 6:30 PM<br><span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span> Michael Karanicolas <<a href="mailto:michael@law-democracy.org">michael@law-democracy.org</a>><br><span style="font-weight:bold">Cc: </span> "<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a>><br><span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span> Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] FOR INFORMATION: Letter from trademark scholars and information on Deloitte Ancillary Services<br></div><div><br></div><blockquote id="MAC_OUTLOOK_ATTRIBUTION_BLOCKQUOTE" style="BORDER-LEFT: #b5c4df 5 solid; PADDING:0 0 0 5; MARGIN:0 0 0 5;"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Michael,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Do you have any solutions for the issues and concerns that have been mitigated by having the database be closed?</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Thanks!</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><p style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"></p><div><p style="text-indent:0in"><span style="font-size:12.8px"><a name="UNIQUE_ID_SafeHtmlFilter_UNIQUE_ID_SafeHtmlFilter__GoBack"></a></span><b style="font-size:12.8px"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; color: rgb(0, 46, 98);">Greg
Shatan<br></span></b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:black">C: 917-816-6428<br>
S: gsshatan<br>Phone-to-Skype: </span><font color="#000000" face="Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:13.3333px">646-845-9428<br></span></font><a href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com" style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif;font-size:10pt;text-indent:0in" target="_blank"><span style="color:#1155cc">gregshatanipc@gmail.com</span></a></p><p style="font-size:12.8px;text-indent:0in"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"></span></p></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 12:21 PM, Michael Karanicolas <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:michael@law-democracy.org" target="_blank">michael@law-democracy.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi all,<br><br>
Just building on the discussion around transparency, after hearing the<br>
conversation at ICANN 58 I drafted my own short note setting out my<br>
thoughts on the issue, which I'm attaching here.<br><br>
I want to be mindful of the conversation on inputs which is ongoing<br>
now - so hopefully it isn't out of place or inappropriate to submit my<br>
thoughts via this method.<br><br>
I very much look forward to further discussions on this issue.<br><br>
Best wishes,<br><br>
Michael Karanicolas<br><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Jeff Neuman <<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Thanks Mary.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Co-Chairs,<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Can I assume that with respect to the EFF letter, the only items we would be<br>
> discussing from that letter at this point are their comments with respect to<br>
> design marks and the transparency of the TMCH database?<br>
><br>
> I am not saying the other comments are not important, but with respect to<br>
> this Working Group at this time, we are not yet addressing those other<br>
> issues.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> I would strongly urge that we not engage yet in the other discussion around<br>
> the other comments at this point (namely, trademark rights in general), as I<br>
> think that could lead us down a large rabbit hole and considerably slow down<br>
> out work.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Thanks.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Jeffrey J. Neuman<br>
><br>
> Senior Vice President |Valideus USA | Com Laude USA<br>
><br>
> 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600<br>
><br>
> Mclean, VA 22102, United States<br>
><br>
> E: <a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com">jeff.neuman@valideus.com</a> or <a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a><br>
><br>
> T: <a href="tel:%2B1.703.635.7514" value="+17036357514">+1.703.635.7514</a><br>
><br>
> M: <a href="tel:%2B1.202.549.5079" value="+12025495079">+1.202.549.5079</a><br>
><br>
> @Jintlaw<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> From: <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@<wbr>icann.org</a>]<br>
> On Behalf Of Mary Wong<br>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 6:15 AM<br>
> To: <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><br>
> Subject: [gnso-rpm-wg] FOR INFORMATION: Letter from trademark scholars and<br>
> information on Deloitte Ancillary Services<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Dear all,<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> During the ICANN58 Working Group sessions in Copenhagen, the following two<br>
> matters came up for which staff is now following up with the requested<br>
> document (for #1) and information (for #2).<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Item #1: Letter of 10 March 2017 from some trademark scholars and<br>
> practitioners to our Working Group co-chairs expressing concerns with<br>
> certain aspects of the TMCH:<br>
> <a href="https://www.eff.org/files/2017/03/10/tm_scholars_letter_to_icann_final.pdf" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.eff.org/files/<wbr>2017/03/10/tm_scholars_letter_<wbr>to_icann_final.pdf</a>.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Item #2: Question regarding the Ancillary Services that Deloitte is<br>
> permitted to provide under its Validation Agreement with ICANN, subject to<br>
> ICANN’s authorization.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Currently, two Ancillary Services have been approved by ICANN:<br>
><br>
> 1. Extended Claims Services<br>
><br>
> The extended claims services provide the Trademark Holder or Trademark<br>
> Agent, as applicable, with an electronic notification when a domain name<br>
> registered in an Eligible TLD matches one or more of such party’s recorded<br>
> labels with the TMCH. The extended claims services does not include a<br>
> domain name pre-registration notification (i.e. a notification to the<br>
> potential registrant of a domain name that the domain name such registrant<br>
> intends to register matches a label recorded with the Trademark<br>
> Clearinghouse).<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> 2. Audit Report<br>
><br>
> Deloitte may offer an audit report service for Trademark Holders and<br>
> Trademark Agents with active Trademark Records recorded in the Trademark<br>
> Clearinghouse. Such audit reports shall consist primarily of a listing of<br>
> matches between their recorded labels within the Trademark Clearinghouse and<br>
> domain names registered in an Eligible TLD.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> FYI, Deloitte’s contract with ICANN is for an initial period expiring on the<br>
> fifth anniversary of ICANN’s entry into a Registry Agreement under the New<br>
> gTLD Program, with consecutive one-year renewals thereafter. Although<br>
> Deloitte currently serves as the sole TMCH validator, ICANN may appoint<br>
> additional validators once ten Qualified Sunrise Periods have been completed<br>
> under the New gTLD Program.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Thanks and cheers<br>
><br>
> Mary<br>
><br>
><br></div></div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<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" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg</a><br></div></div><br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<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" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div>
_______________________________________________
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg</a></blockquote></span></body></html>