<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=utf-8"><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;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",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:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle25
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle26
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle27
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle28
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle29
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.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;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1270964183;
mso-list-template-ids:-210085712;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></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="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>Dear All,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: auto;text-align:start;widows: auto;-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;word-spacing:0px'><span style='color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: auto;text-align:start;widows: auto;-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;word-spacing:0px'><span style='color:black'>Please see below the action items and notes captured by staff from the<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span>RPM PDP Working Group<span style='color:black'> call held on</span> 10 October<span style='color:black'> 2018 (</span>17:00-19:00<span style='color:black'> UTC). Staff have posted to the wiki space the action items and notes. <b><i>Please note that these </i></b></span><b><i>are<span style='color:black'> high-level notes and are not meant as a substitute for the recording</span>, chat room, or transcript</i></b><i><span style='color:black'>.</span></i><span style='color:black'> The recording, AC chat,</span> transcript<span style='color:black'> and attendance records are posted on the wiki<span class=apple-converted-space> </span>at</span>: <a href="https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/2018-10-10+Review+of+all+Rights+Protection+Mechanisms+%28RPMs%29+in+all+gTLDs+PDP+WG">https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/2018-10-10+Review+of+all+Rights+Protection+Mechanisms+%28RPMs%29+in+all+gTLDs+PDP+WG</a>. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>See also the proposals at: <a href="https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/URS+Proposals">https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/URS+Proposals</a>. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: auto;text-align:start;widows: auto;-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;word-spacing:0px'><span style='color:black'>Best Regards,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: auto;text-align:start;widows: auto;-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;word-spacing:0px'>Julie<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: auto;text-align:start;widows: auto;-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;word-spacing:0px'>Julie Hedlund, Policy Director<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>==</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><b>NOTES & ACTION ITEMS</b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Chair: Kathy Kleiman<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>1. Review Agenda/Statements of Interest Updates: No updates<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>2. Discussion of Individual URS Proposals (See: <a href="https://community.icann.org/x/aACNBQ">https://community.icann.org/x/aACNBQ</a>)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>1. George Kirikos (#5): https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/93126760/URS-Proposal-5.pdf?api=v2<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Discussion:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Statute of limitations is based on known or should have known.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Question: How does this proposal deal with issues of continuing harm? How to deal with the issue of known or should have known?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Worth getting public comments on.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Put into the Initial Report for discussion. There is support for and against.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- There has been no survey of national law.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- This would create an exception that could blow a hole in the policy.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Worthy for further review and discussion.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Needs to be put on the table for discussion.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Ripe for discussion.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Response:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Didn't make a latches proposal because it is more complicated to prove.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Useful to survey national law.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Re: "submarine registration" it is a possibility but they would have to be paying renewal costs in the mean time.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Still a recourse to the courts for all other disputes.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>2. George Kirikos (#7): https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/93126760/URS-Proposal-7.pdf?api=v2<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Discussion:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Support including the proposal in the Initial Report..<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- No legal contact right now in the WHOIS. Requirement for everyone is high burden.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Revise proposal to say, "If a legal contact is required then in that case..."?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Seems like we would be making recommendations where other parts of the community are working.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Think it is okay to make recommendations for other groups.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Response:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Isn't meant to force someone to have a legal contact if they don't want one. It is just another means of contact in the WHOIS.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>3. George Kirikos (#8): https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/93126760/URS-Proposal-8.pdf?api=v2<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Discussion:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Don't know what this proposal does that doesn't already exist in the URS.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Don't know how the three days would equate to more than what they can already do.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- The issue with actual notice not sure if you drag it out for 3 more days’ notice will be achieved.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Seems to be effectively a limitation period. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Would increase the time (contrary to "rapid).<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- In the Sub Team analysis there was no evidence of people missing the notifications.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Response:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Having the additional time period would reduce incidences of default and suspensions.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Seems like rapid doesn't apply to bringing complaint.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- High rate of default is evidence of the problem.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>4. Marie Pattullo (staff to present on behalf of Marie) (#13): https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/93126760/URS-Proposal-13.pdf?api=v2<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Discussion:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Good intention, but could be problematic to implement. Could be impossible for a registrar to handle on its own. Interested in how to overcome the technical problems.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Would be interested in the evidence. Is it happening? Does it happen often? Check with Berry Cobb re: evidence of a losing registrant re-registering.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Sufficient merit for going into the Initial Report.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Creative proposal. Need to distinguish implementation changes from policy challenges.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Costly monitoring burden on the trademark holder.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Strongly oppose putting out for public comment when it is impossible to implement. Cannot distinguish between registrants even within the same registrar.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Seems to be unbalanced. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Response: Staff will convey the discussion from the transcript and the chat for Marie to respond to.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>5. George Kirikos (#12): https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/93126760/URS-Proposal-12.pdf?api=v2<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Discussion:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Strongly opposed. Challenge: If you transfer a trademark to a new owner and they do something different with it then the clock does reset.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Support including it in the Initial Report.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- In the UDRP there is a lot of ambiguity of what the creation date represents. Ambiguity if a domain is deleted and then re-registered. Area worthy of further discussion.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Interesting but needs further development.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- It's binary -- either it exists or it does not.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Response:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Overriding concern is that we want to have safe harbors for when a TM is transfered.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Conceivably a domain name could not be fully deleted.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Statute of limitations would be another way to handle it.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>6. George Kirikos (#18): https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/93126760/URS-Proposal-18.pdf?api=v2<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Discussion:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Needs to be reworked. Not sure it is universally applicable.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- This has been extensively debated in the IGO/INGO.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Real problem if the policies are worded in a way that courts aren't allowing it.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- There is no real problem here -- it is an outlier case.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Not sure in favor of the proposals as currently written. There are <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Worth getting community feedback.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Response:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- There were at least 2 cases in the UK and also in Australia.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>7. George Kirikos (#19): https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/93126760/URS-Proposal-19.pdf?api=v2<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Discussion:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Does address the concern among some WG members that ICANN cannot decide what case a court will here. This proposal would be able to effect how courts deal with subsequent action following URS.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- In the URS there are multiple avenues for appeal. The registrant does have avenues for recourse.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Response:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-- Not fair to say that there are multiple avenues for recourse in the URS since it doesn't have the same recourses as a court.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>8. George Kirikos (#20): https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/93126760/URS-Proposal-20.pdf?api=v2<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Discussion: See the chat. <o:p></o:p></p></div></body></html>