<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"> P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} </style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
I think you're making our point. It's pretty easy to get a list of an entity's registered marks in the US and most other jurisdictions, not a matter of hours of work. It would require
<i>more </i>work to run them against the TMCH to figure out the lack of overlap than to just go ahead and try everything, thus discovering which get a Notice. </div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
Our argument is that transparency has a number of benefits, including to legitimate commercial entities, and that your abuse scenario is not avoided by lack of transparency. So, while you can assume I'm against phishing, my opinion about your hypothetical
does not change as a result.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div id="Signature">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px">
<div><br>
</div>
Rebecca Tushnet</div>
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px">Frank Stanton Professor of First Amendment Law, Harvard Law School<br>
703 593 6759 </div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="appendonsend"></div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> claudio di gangi <ipcdigangi@gmail.com><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, October 23, 2019 6:39 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Tushnet, Rebecca <rtushnet@law.harvard.edu><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Mike <mkaranicolas@gmail.com>; gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [GNSO-RPM-WG] FW: New Q15 Proposal re: Actions & Notes: RPM PDP WG Meeting 16 October 2019</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">Rebecca,</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="Verdana"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="Verdana">Michael's example was someone was going to spend hours querying the 1000 trademarks (which presumably they spent tons of time and energy researching to identify in the first instance), that a company owned, i.e. by
seeking to register them as domain names in new gTLDs, in order to determine which 50 TMs are registered in the TMCH, and which 950 are not in the TMCH.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Do you see this is good faith activity or TMCH data mining? If you see this as good faith activity, what possible good faith purpose would someone have for doing this?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best,</div>
<div>Claudio</div>
<font color="#073763" face="Verdana"> </font></font></div>
<p><br>
</p>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="x_gmail_quote">
<div class="x_gmail_attr" dir="ltr">On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 6:24 PM Tushnet, Rebecca <<a href="mailto:rtushnet@law.harvard.edu">rtushnet@law.harvard.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="x_gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left:1ex; border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204); border-left-width:1px; border-left-style:solid">
<div dir="auto">I was objecting to the idea that a domain name registrant or would be registrant has any duties arising out of a relationship with the TMCH. You characterized them as accessing confidential information by attempting to register; I can’t see
how that is true. And I think there are multiple acceptable reasons to see what’s available for registration. The bad actor isn’t bad because its attempt is checked against the TMCH, but because of its intended use in your hypothetical. <br>
<br>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Rebecca Tushnet</div>
<div>Frank Stanton Professor of First Amendment Law, Harvard Law School</div>
<div><br>
</div>
Sent from my phone. Apologies for terseness/typos. </div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<blockquote type="cite">On Oct 23, 2019, at 6:10 PM, claudio di gangi <<a href="mailto:ipcdigangi@gmail.com" target="_blank">ipcdigangi@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">Rebecca,</font></div>
<p></p>
<div><font color="#073763" face="Verdana">I didn't just say "receive a notice" - I was referring to misusing the system to mine the TMCH data. Are you suggesting this practice is OK from your point of view?</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="Verdana"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="Verdana">Best,</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="Verdana">Claudio</font></div>
<br>
<p></p>
<p></p>
</div>
<br>
<div class="x_gmail_quote">
<div class="x_gmail_attr" dir="ltr">On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 5:44 PM Tushnet, Rebecca <<a href="mailto:rtushnet@law.harvard.edu" target="_blank">rtushnet@law.harvard.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="x_gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left:1ex; border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204); border-left-width:1px; border-left-style:solid">
<div dir="auto">Receiving a Notice is not accessing confidential data. No one is under any confidentiality obligations with respect to Notices. <br>
<br>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Rebecca Tushnet</div>
<div>Frank Stanton Professor of First Amendment Law, Harvard Law School</div>
<div><br>
</div>
Sent from my phone. Apologies for terseness/typos. </div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<blockquote type="cite">On Oct 23, 2019, at 5:38 PM, claudio di gangi <<a href="mailto:ipcdigangi@gmail.com" target="_blank">ipcdigangi@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">Michael,</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="Verdana"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">When you say "By spending a few hours querying for each of the 1000 trademarks and seeing when a claims notification pops up." - do you mean "by misusing the system in order to gain access to confidential
data that I am not otherwise entitled to have access to"?</font></div>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><font color="#073763" face="Verdana"><br>
</font></div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><font color="#073763" face="Verdana">Your response actually exposes how someone can try to game the system because 1) they are getting away with breaking the rules; or 2) sufficient rules are not already in place or enforced to prevent illicit
data mining.</font>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif"><br>
So, unfortunately, your response doesn't move the needle in one iota on the substantive of the issue/concern that I articulated in my last note.</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="Verdana"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="Verdana">Best regards</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="Verdana">Claudio</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="Verdana"><br>
</font></div>
<font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">
<div><font color="#073763" face="Verdana"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="Verdana"><br>
</font></div>
<div><br>
</div>
</font>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="x_gmail_quote">
<div class="x_gmail_attr" dir="ltr">On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 5:22 PM Mike <<a href="mailto:mkaranicolas@gmail.com" target="_blank">mkaranicolas@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="x_gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left:1ex; border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204); border-left-width:1px; border-left-style:solid">
<div dir="auto">And, as we have also been over, the bad actor in Claudio’s scenario could already do that by spending a few hours querying for each of the 1000 trademarks and seeing when a claims notification pops up.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So, seeing as this is already possible, there’s no need to dwell in the realm of the hypothetical. Claudio - do you have any examples of this actually happening?</div>
<div>
<div><br>
<div id="x_gmail-m_-779824128086641697gmail-m_2456309129608313046gmail-m_5733172461971722783AppleMailSignature" dir="ltr">
Sent from my iPhone</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
On Oct 23, 2019, at 4:55 PM, Tushnet, Rebecca <<a href="mailto:rtushnet@law.harvard.edu" target="_blank">rtushnet@law.harvard.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0); font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt">
As we've been over, the theoretical possibility you hypothesize here--especially as compared to the availability of open registration systems through most of the world--is not particularly plausible. We haven't even seen evidence that scammers do this with
existing open registration systems, which provide exactly the guide they ought to be using by your reasoning. </div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0); font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0); font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt">
I am interested by the idea that openness about what receives a Notice--that is, what strings have actually triggered notices, which reflects what people are looking for and not what's in the TMCH as a whole--is a path towards greater transparency. I look
forward to Staff's answer about that as to the AG report.</div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0); font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt">
<br>
</div>
<div id="x_gmail-m_-779824128086641697gmail-m_2456309129608313046gmail-m_5733172461971722783Signature">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px">
<div><br>
</div>
Rebecca Tushnet</div>
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px">Frank Stanton Professor of First Amendment Law, Harvard Law School<br>
703 593 6759 </div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="x_gmail-m_-779824128086641697gmail-m_2456309129608313046gmail-m_5733172461971722783appendonsend">
</div>
<hr style="width:98%; display:inline-block">
<div id="x_gmail-m_-779824128086641697gmail-m_2456309129608313046gmail-m_5733172461971722783divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr">
<font color="#000000" face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt"><b>From:</b> claudio di gangi <<a href="mailto:ipcdigangi@gmail.com" target="_blank">ipcdigangi@gmail.com</a>><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, October 23, 2019 4:37 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Tushnet, Rebecca <<a href="mailto:rtushnet@law.harvard.edu" target="_blank">rtushnet@law.harvard.edu</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Marie Pattullo <<a href="mailto:marie.pattullo@aim.be" target="_blank">marie.pattullo@aim.be</a>>; John McElwaine <<a href="mailto:john.mcelwaine@nelsonmullins.com" target="_blank">john.mcelwaine@nelsonmullins.com</a>>;
<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a> <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [GNSO-RPM-WG] FW: New Q15 Proposal re: Actions & Notes: RPM PDP WG Meeting 16 October 2019</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">Rebecca, all,</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">As I previously described on the list (to which I haven't seen a direct response by anyone) the concern with an "open" TMCH is the aggregation of IP data for a specific purpose, i.e. protection from DNS abuse.</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">No query through WIPO or national TMO databases can reveal this information.
</font></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">Hypo: a trademark owner owns 1000 trademarks; so they decide to select 50 TMs based on an informed judgment (based on previous UDRPs, C&D letters, etc.) that they believe are most likely to be abused in the
DNS/new gTLDs and record them in the TMCH for protection through Sunrise and Claims.</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">An open TMCH would expose that information to cyber-criminals, giving them important insights that they can't find anywhere else in the world.
</font></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">They could then proceed to focus on abusively registering any of the other 950 trademarks the
</font><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">company has registered, but which are not recorded in the TMCH, since they will know with certainty the TM owner won't receive a Claims notice and they will be able to register the domain as soon as General
Availability opens up. </font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">Upon which time they can set up a 48-72 hour phishing scheme to steal as much consumer sensitive information as possible, and/or perpetrate criminal fraud to steal money or data from the company by sending
out "official-looking" emails (that incorporate the brand name) to corporate executives, resellers, etc.</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="Verdana"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="Verdana">Or on the flip-side, they may infer "these are the most important 50 TMs to that company" - so I will register them as domains in <.com> or in ccTLDs and extort money from the TM owner.</font></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">One middle ground solution may be permit a TMCH "Opt-in" for TM owners that are fine or desire to have their TMCH records made public so they have that option available as a voluntary choice.
</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">For example, some TM owners may believe having this information public may have a deterrent effect on cybersquatters, depending on the specifics of their own TM and domain portfolios.</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">Hope this helps clarify the concern some have with an open aggregated data system that has the details of valuable IP recorded in one location and for one specific purpose.</font></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">Also, as I mentioned on today's and on previous calls - other solutions can be explored at the Registry-level, where the hypothetical registrant who is "gaming" Sunrise, has a contractual relationship with
a specific registry operator, who has the ability to delete the registration because it violates their terms of use.
</font></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">In fact, I have indicated willingness on several occasions to form a small group to further explore this option/solution, but no one has accepted my offer...</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">Best regards,</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="verdana,sans-serif">Claudio</font><br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 2:19 PM Tushnet, Rebecca <<a href="mailto:rtushnet@law.harvard.edu" target="_blank">rtushnet@law.harvard.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left:1ex; border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204); border-left-width:1px; border-left-style:solid">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0); font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt">
Marie, I suggest you reread the materials John sent: one key rationale--that access to the TMCH would disclose jurisdictions in which a TM is not registered--is flatly wrong, as you agree. The arguments were based on a misapprehension of what the TMCH was.</div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0); font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt">
<br>
</div>
<div id="x_gmail-m_-779824128086641697gmail-m_2456309129608313046gmail-m_5733172461971722783x_gmail-m_-8660492703894110872Signature">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px">
<div><br>
</div>
Rebecca Tushnet</div>
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px">Frank Stanton Professor of First Amendment Law, Harvard Law School<br>
703 593 6759 </div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="x_gmail-m_-779824128086641697gmail-m_2456309129608313046gmail-m_5733172461971722783x_gmail-m_-8660492703894110872appendonsend">
</div>
<hr style="width:98%; display:inline-block">
<div id="x_gmail-m_-779824128086641697gmail-m_2456309129608313046gmail-m_5733172461971722783x_gmail-m_-8660492703894110872divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr">
<font color="#000000" face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt"><b>From:</b> Marie Pattullo <<a href="mailto:marie.pattullo@aim.be" target="_blank">marie.pattullo@aim.be</a>><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, October 23, 2019 1:47 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Tushnet, Rebecca <<a href="mailto:rtushnet@law.harvard.edu" target="_blank">rtushnet@law.harvard.edu</a>>; John McElwaine <<a href="mailto:john.mcelwaine@nelsonmullins.com" target="_blank">john.mcelwaine@nelsonmullins.com</a>>;
<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a> <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [GNSO-RPM-WG] FW: New Q15 Proposal re: Actions & Notes: RPM PDP WG Meeting 16 October 2019</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div lang="EN-GB">
<div>
<p><span style="color:black; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">Rebecca, the TMCH has nothing to do with where TMs are/are not registered.</span></p>
<p><span style="color:black; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">I’m afraid I don’t understand where you are going with the below.</span></p>
<p><span style="color:black; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">Marie</span></p>
<p><span style="color:black; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<div>
<div style="border-width:1pt medium medium; border-style:solid none none; border-color:rgb(225,225,225) currentColor currentColor; padding:3pt 0cm 0cm">
<p><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> GNSO-RPM-WG <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Tushnet, Rebecca<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, October 23, 2019 7:31 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> John McElwaine <<a href="mailto:john.mcelwaine@nelsonmullins.com" target="_blank">john.mcelwaine@nelsonmullins.com</a>>;
<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [GNSO-RPM-WG] FW: New Q15 Proposal re: Actions & Notes: RPM PDP WG Meeting 16 October 2019</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p> </p>
<div>
<p><span style="color:black; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">These excerpts make clear that the objections to transparency were based on fundamental factual misunderstandings of what the TMCH would be. I hope that no one in this group would agree that one
can figure out jurisdictions in which a TM is not registered by looking at a TMCH entry, which requires only one valid registration from one jurisdiction. (As has been pointed out, there are already public tools to look at registrations across jurisdictions;
the TMCH couldn't be one of them.) Similarly, the way to figure out if a domain name is registered is to look at that domain name, not at the TMCH, which will likewise not tell you anything. (And of course Sunrise requires proof of use, so that should already
be public.)</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p><span style="color:black; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span></p>
</div>
<div id="x_gmail-m_-779824128086641697gmail-m_2456309129608313046gmail-m_5733172461971722783x_gmail-m_-8660492703894110872x_Signature">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p><span style="font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif; font-size:10pt"> </span></p>
</div>
<p><span style="font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif; font-size:10pt">Rebecca Tushnet</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p><span style="font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif; font-size:10pt">Frank Stanton Professor of First Amendment Law, Harvard Law School<br>
703 593 6759 </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div align="center" style="text-align:center">
<hr width="98%" size="2" align="center">
</div>
<div id="x_gmail-m_-779824128086641697gmail-m_2456309129608313046gmail-m_5733172461971722783x_gmail-m_-8660492703894110872x_divRplyFwdMsg">
<p><b><span style="color:black; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">From:</span></b><span style="color:black; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> GNSO-RPM-WG <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>>
on behalf of John McElwaine <<a href="mailto:john.mcelwaine@nelsonmullins.com" target="_blank">john.mcelwaine@nelsonmullins.com</a>><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, October 23, 2019 1:00 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a> <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [GNSO-RPM-WG] FW: New Q15 Proposal re: Actions & Notes: RPM PDP WG Meeting 16 October 2019</span>
</p>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">I recall that the issue of the confidentiality of the TMCH database specifically came up in the Implementation Assistance Group (IAG) which
was the group putting together the details and rules of the TMCH. </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">Having “Data Access” limited to a “need to know basis” was how the subject was originally introduced to the IAG. I believe (but am not
sure) that this “Data Access” may have resulted out of Section 8.1 of the STI Report which stated:</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white; margin-left:36pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">If feasible, the TM Claims Notice should provide links, or provide alternative methods of providing access, to the registrant
for accessing the TC Database information referenced in the TM Claims Notice for a fuller understanding of the TM rights being claimed by the trademark owner. These links shall be provided in real time without cost to the Registrant. The implementation details
should be left to ICANN Staff to determine how to easily provide access to registrants to this information.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">From the September 26, 2012 Report of the IAG which was used to prepare “the draft implementation model of the Trademark Clearinghouse
published by ICANN for discussion purposes”:</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white; margin-left:36pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">Misuse of Data</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white; margin-left:36pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">To minimize abuse, distribution of TMCH data should be limited to situations where necessary to implement TMCH functionality.
It should also be justified by technical, performance, uptime, availability, and economic factors. At a minimum, there should be sufficient contractual restrictions to provide enforcement capabilities to guard against abuse of the access and information provided
through the TMCH. Specifically, rights holders have expressed concerns related to the aggregation of mark data through the TMCH, which may expose their brand protection strategies or be used to gather competitive intelligence by competitors. If
<b><u>the TMCH database is freely searchable and accessible, it could be possible to identify a rights holder’s gaps in its intellectual property protection strategies</u></b>. For example, it might be possible to identify jurisdictions in which the rights
holder has not registered its trademarks or in which it has not chosen to defensively register domain names. In this regard, this information could be misused by criminals, such as to conduct phishing attacks or other types of social engineering attacks.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white; margin-left:36pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white; margin-left:36pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">In addition, concerns were raised with regard to limiting information submitted in the TMCH that may be valuable to a
competitor, especially with regards to a brand-related registry. If it is possible to do extensive searching of the database to compile a list of marks that a mark holder has registered, some IAG members believed that this can reveal the mark holder’s brand
protection strategy because it shows which marks it believes are more valuable than others. If someone can access all of the countries where a specific brand is registered, this may also create competitive advantage because a competitor might go to the unprotected
jurisdiction and register the mark before the mark holder. The TMCH should not allow extensive searching to be done in a manner where a trademark holder’s entire portfolio could be easily accessed. Accordingly, the TMCH should be structured to address how
to minimize data mining by a registry of a competitor’s trademark registration patterns.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">The above report and analysis was related to work undertaken by the IAG looking at the “Data Access” (which labeled issue T1). From the
April 13, 2012 Draft Implementation Model:</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white; margin-left:36pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">Specifically, some rights holders indicated concern that the aggregation of rights data through the Clearinghouse may
expose corporate strategies or be used to gather competitive intelligence, particularly if the database is freely searchable and accessible. For example, it might be possible to identify jurisdictions in which a rights holder has not registered its trademarks
or in which it has not chosen to register domain names. In this regard, this information could drive uses such as phishing or other types of social engineering activities.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border-width:1pt medium medium; border-style:solid none none; border-color:rgb(225,225,225) currentColor currentColor; padding:3pt 0cm 0cm">
<p style="background:white"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> GNSO-RPM-WG <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Kathy Kleiman<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, October 23, 2019 11:22 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [GNSO-RPM-WG] FW: New Q15 Proposal re: Actions & Notes: RPM PDP WG Meeting 16 October 2019</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div>
<p style="background:white"><strong><span lang="EN-US" style="color:red; font-family:"Arial",sans-serif; font-size:10pt">◄External Email►</span></strong><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif; font-size:10pt"> - From:
<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>
</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif; font-size:10pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif; font-size:10pt">The Trademark Clearinghouse database -- as negotiated by the GNSO Council appointed group and approved unanimously by the GNSO Council and ICANN Board -- was
*not* secret or confidential. It's openness was discussed, debated and agreed to as a monitoring and oversight mechanism, and additionally because so much of what was already within the TMCH would be public materials -- registered trademarks themselves.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif; font-size:10pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif; font-size:10pt">Kathy (with my hat as member of the STI)</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif; font-size:10pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif; font-size:10pt">On 10/23/2019 10:52 AM, Marie Pattullo wrote:</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt; margin-bottom:5pt">
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">Thanks, Julie. I’m about to go into a call so apologies for the hit & run response, but initial thoughts inline:</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">Para one:
</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">The Working Group understands that, on the one hand, trademark owners may register trademarks and enter them into the Trademark Clearinghouse as part of
a business-confidential strategy, including for new products yet to enter the market.
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:red; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">Access to the database would allow misuse, including by bad actors and/or competitors.
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">On the other hand, some Working Group members have noted
<span style="background:yellow">that it was not clear</span>, during the lead up to the launch of the 2012 New gTLD Program, that the Trademark Clearinghouse database was intended to be a non-publicly-accessible, confidential database.
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="background:yellow; color:red; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">I wasn’t involved then, but I thought Claudio said that it was always intended to be confidential? I’ve never seen reference to it being considered
as being an open resources.</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:red; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> In addition, some Working Group members expressed concern that potential registrants may benefit from knowing what marks are already in the Trademark Clearinghouse database
prior to attempting a registration, especially in view of the likelihood (based on discussions the Working Group has held with the current Trademark Clearinghouse validator) that some marks may consist of generic words which potential registrants may legitimately
wish to use as a domain name. </span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:red; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">If it’s a legitimate use, then brand holders won’t stop them.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">The Working Group agrees in principle that an audit of the Trademark Clearinghouse database can be beneficial.
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:red; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">I still have reservations about this – I don’t think the potential harm, based on fact, is an equal balance for the potential gain, based on supposition.
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">Accordingly, the Working Group recommends that, in order to inform the next review of the Trademark Clearinghouse, a small group of community volunteers be formed that will have
limited, specifically-defined, confidential access to the Trademark Clearinghouse database, for the sole purpose of working with ICANN Org and any appointed third party examiner on such review. The scope of such confidential access is to be limited to oversight
purposes only and must not violate any terms of confidentiality that apply to trademark owners whose marks are already in the Trademark Clearinghouse database at that time.
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:red; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">Should this be take forward, any trademark owners that have chosen to enter their trademarks in the Trademark Clearinghouse must first be given time to consider if
they wish to remove them, and to do so, before they are made known to any such community members, with appropriate safeguards considered for the effect that this may have on such trademark owners.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border-width:1pt medium medium; border-style:solid none none; border-color:rgb(225,225,225) currentColor currentColor; padding:3pt 0cm 0cm">
<p style="background:white"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> GNSO-RPM-WG
<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank"><gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org></a>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Tushnet, Rebecca<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, October 23, 2019 3:15 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Julie Hedlund <a href="mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org" target="_blank">
<julie.hedlund@icann.org></a>; <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">
gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [GNSO-RPM-WG] New Q15 Proposal re: Actions & Notes: RPM PDP WG Meeting 16 October 2019</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">I asked this in the meeting but didn't directly address it to Staff: Analysis Group reported on the top ten queried terms in the TMCH. Is it Staff's understanding that this
disclosure by AG breached a confidentiality duty? </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">The description "n</span><span lang="EN-US" style="background:white; color:rgb(32,31,30); font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">on-publicly-accessible, confidential
database" is not accurate, given that members of the public with no duties of confidentiality can find out on a term-by-term basis by attempting to register. I would suggest something like "database that is inaccessible to the public except through individual
registration attempts."</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">More generally, I think the proposal needs to state ICANN's understanding of the current rule. Without a clear statement of the current rule, I don't think this audit proposal
is understandable--and to the extent it suggests that disclosing anything, including a top ten list, is a violation of confidentiality, that seems like a worsening of the problem.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div id="x_gmail-m_-779824128086641697gmail-m_2456309129608313046gmail-m_5733172461971722783x_gmail-m_-8660492703894110872x_x_Signature">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif; font-size:10pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif; font-size:10pt">Rebecca Tushnet</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif; font-size:10pt">Frank Stanton Professor of First Amendment Law, Harvard Law School<br>
703 593 6759 </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div align="center" style="background:white; text-align:center"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">
<hr width="98%" size="2" align="center">
</span></div>
<div id="x_gmail-m_-779824128086641697gmail-m_2456309129608313046gmail-m_5733172461971722783x_gmail-m_-8660492703894110872x_x_divRplyFwdMsg">
<p style="background:white"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; font-size:11pt"> GNSO-RPM-WG <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>>
on behalf of Julie Hedlund <<a href="mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org" target="_blank">julie.hedlund@icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, October 23, 2019 9:01 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a> <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [GNSO-RPM-WG] New Q15 Proposal re: Actions & Notes: RPM PDP WG Meeting 16 October 2019</span><span lang="EN-US">
</span></p>
<div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">Dear WG members,</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">Per the action item below to draft a new Q15 proposal relating to the discussion during the meeting on 16 October, staff submits for your consideration the following suggested text. We very much look forward to
working with you on further revisions as needed, as well as to the discussion on today’s call.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">Kind regards,</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">Mary, Ariel, and Julie</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><u><span lang="EN-US">Staff-suggested draft (based on Working Group discussions and suggestions made on the Working Group call of 16 October)</span></u><span lang="EN-US">:</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">The Working Group understands that, on the one hand, trademark owners may register trademarks and enter them into the Trademark Clearinghouse as part of a business-confidential strategy, including for new products
yet to enter the market. On the other hand, some Working Group members have noted that it was not clear, during the lead up to the launch of the 2012 New gTLD Program, that the Trademark Clearinghouse database was intended to be a non-publicly-accessible,
confidential database. In addition, some Working Group members expressed concern that potential registrants may benefit from knowing what marks are already in the Trademark Clearinghouse database prior to attempting a registration, especially in view of the
likelihood (based on discussions the Working Group has held with the current Trademark Clearinghouse validator) that some marks may consist of generic words which potential registrants may legitimately wish to use as a domain name.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">The Working Group agrees in principle that an audit of the Trademark Clearinghouse database can be beneficial. Accordingly, the Working Group recommends that, in order to inform the next review of the Trademark
Clearinghouse, a small group of community volunteers be formed that will have limited, specifically-defined, confidential access to the Trademark Clearinghouse database, for the sole purpose of working with ICANN Org and any appointed third party examiner
on such review. The scope of such confidential access is to be limited to oversight purposes only and must not violate any terms of confidentiality that apply to trademark owners whose marks are already in the Trademark Clearinghouse database at that time.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div style="border-width:1pt medium medium; border-style:solid none none; border-color:rgb(181,196,223) currentColor currentColor; padding:3pt 0cm 0cm">
<p style="background:white"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt">From: </span>
</b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt">GNSO-RPM-WG <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <<a href="mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org" target="_blank">julie.hedlund@icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Wednesday, October 16, 2019 at 3:27 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>"<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>[GNSO-RPM-WG] Actions & Notes: RPM PDP WG Meeting 16 October 2019</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">Dear All,</span></p>
<p style="background:white; word-spacing:0px"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white; word-spacing:0px"><span lang="EN-US">Please see below the action items captured by staff from the<span> </span>RPM PDP Working Group call held on 16 October 2019 at 17:00 UTC. Staff will post these to the wiki space. <b><i>Please
note that these are high-level notes and are not meant as a substitute for the recording, chat room, or transcript</i></b><i>.</i> The recording, Zoom chat, transcript and attendance records are posted on the wiki<span> </span>at:
<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_RARPMRIAGPWG_2019-2D10-2D16-2BReview-2Bof-2Ball-2BRights-2BProtection-2BMechanisms-2B-2528RPMs-2529-2Bin-2Ball-2BgTLDs-2BPDP-2BWG&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=GU7oC_LaBo7KvH3LCTYNBb2Z62O2_gB7PePpFA2YNvE&s=Lebe-G6v-muk6fUa-l7fXJ95Vfc50wtSu3jY53kDW2k&e=" target="_blank">
https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/2019-10-16+Review+of+all+Rights+Protection+Mechanisms+%28RPMs%29+in+all+gTLDs+PDP+WG</a>.
</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">Best Regards,</span></p>
<p style="background:white; word-spacing:0px"><span lang="EN-US">Julie</span></p>
<p style="background:white; word-spacing:0px"><span lang="EN-US">Julie Hedlund, Policy Director</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif; font-size:10pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif; font-size:10pt">==</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif; font-size:10pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><span lang="EN-US">NOTES & ACTION ITEMS</span></b><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><span lang="EN-US">Actions:</span></b><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><span lang="EN-US">Open and Deferred TMCH Questions:</span></b><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><u><span lang="EN-US">Q7 Design Marks</span></u><span lang="EN-US">: ACTION: WG agrees to publish Kleiman/Muscovitch and Shatan proposals in the Initial Report for Public Comment.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><u><span lang="EN-US">Q8 GIs: ACTION</span></u><span lang="EN-US">: WG agrees to publish Tushnet proposal in the Initial Report for Public Comment.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><u><span lang="EN-US">Q12</span></u><span lang="EN-US">: ACTION: Staff will work with Maxim to revise the proposal to include context and background, and make it more formal. Make it clear that this is an implementation recommendation,
not policy. Publish to the WG email list for review.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><u><span lang="EN-US">Q15</span></u><span lang="EN-US">: ACTIONS: 1) WG agrees to publish Karanicolas proposal in the Initial Report for Public Comment. 2) ACTION: Staff to draft a new proposal based on suggestions and circulate
it to interested WG members and the Co-Chairs.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><u><span lang="EN-US">Q2</span></u><span lang="EN-US">: Proposal from Martin Pablo Silva Valent: ACTIONS: 1) Martin to revise the proposal with assistance of other WG members and circulate it on the WG email list for review. 2) Staff
will check to see if either party to the contract can seek modifications.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><span lang="EN-US">Discussion of whether individual URS proposals should be revisited by the WG, and methodology for doing so: </span></b><span lang="EN-US">ACTION: WG members are requested to continue discussion on the email
list. See the draft survey at: <span> </span><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__forms.gle_kak3MEWFTNeq69wN9&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=36glY4CKyg4JCvpnCKFaXpx9PW_r5RObgdpcO0mtVM8&s=pEK5aTpdV-IIoTgVC0PHNGEZ969HY26RoiVzAAphdcw&e=" target="_blank">survey
[forms.gle]</a>.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><span lang="EN-US">Notes:</span></b><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">1. Updates to Statements of Interest: No updates provided.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">2. Status of Questions Q7, Q8, Q12, and Q15:</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">Q7 Design Marks: ACTION: WG agrees to publish Kleiman/Muscovitch and Shatan proposals in the Initial Report for Public Comment.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">Q8 GIs: ACTION: WG agrees to publish Tushnet proposal in the Initial Report for Public Comment.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">Q12: Proposal from Maxim Alzoba – TMCH Operational Considerations</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Need to improve redundancy and availability of the TMCH.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Question: Are you referring to the TM database, run by IBM? Deloitte is the validator and IBM is the maintainer of the database. Answer: Relates to the provision of the database. Or could be a issue with
the design, it’s hard to say. Need to review how it works. Might not be limited to software functions. Could be dataflow design.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Need to get background on the cases reported to GDD colleagues. The validation function is kept separate from the database function. If the WG wishes to investigate this further this is probably an issue with
implementation as to SLA (there are applicable SLAs). Need also to go back and look at the deliberations concerning the original design of the TMCH and database.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Information about the SOW with IBM (and for that matter the SLAs with Deloitte) on this Working Group wiki page, under TMCH Contracting:
<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_pages_viewpage.action-3FpageId-3D61606864&d=DwMDaQ&c=qmi9WrYRGQEDDOxOwKrAjW7mWovpzN_EKyRbeK_zbP0&r=Kepk-9GEB6JgOj0vUGl8c0hdrRM7FW-8Is-VAQU1VAk&m=6PdODCxx0pFS_O8Ct151GXBvBolgy6QESpwRhpAInzE&s=AaHHM_PFma3YOKVp3Fa79Iw_DMDLVZUNFVKWJgOPee8&e=" target="_blank">
https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=61606864</a></span><span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">ACTION: Staff will work with Maxim to revise the proposal to include context and background, and make it more formal. Make it clear that this is an implementation recommendation, not policy. Publish to the WG
email list for review.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">Q15: ACTION: WG agrees to publish Karanicolas proposal in the Initial Report for Public Comment.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Hoped that we could get consensus.
</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Could allow a limited group to access the data, perhaps a future review team? Can’t just open up now when those who participate have been assured of confidentiality.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Question - is there a way for the WG to reach agreement on how to ensure there is some kind of specific, limited access to the data in the TMDB for oversight purposes only (including future reviews)?</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">ACTION: Staff to draft a new proposal based on suggestions and circulate it to interested WG members and the Co-Chairs.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">3. Remaining Deferred Charter Questions (see the attached Status of WG Discussions on Agreed TMCH Charter Questions):</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><i><span lang="EN-US"> </span></i></b><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><i><span lang="EN-US">a. Close Discussion:</span></i></b><span><span lang="EN-US"> </span></span><span lang="EN-US">TMCH Category 6: Balance: Charter Question 16: Close discussion.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><i><span lang="EN-US">b. Discussion:</span></i></b><span><span lang="EN-US"> </span></span><span lang="EN-US">TMCH Category 1: Education: Charter Questions 1, 2, and 3 – Proposal submitted by Martin P Valent for Q2 (<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_download_attachments_109482780_Martin-2520Pablo-2520Silva-2520Valent-2520-2D-2520Q2.pdf-3Fversion-3D1-26modificationDate-3D1569963225000-26api-3Dv2&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=GU7oC_LaBo7KvH3LCTYNBb2Z62O2_gB7PePpFA2YNvE&s=PKnCPcJaP-hGDv7k41qSJp4G-vUa7kFbgWNfm3FAImo&e=" target="_blank">1
Oct 2019</a>) </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><i><span lang="EN-US"> </span></i></b><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">Q1: Close discussion.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">Q2: Proposal from Martin Pablo Silva Valent:</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- TMCH should educate rights holders; it is already doing outreach and should do more.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Needs to be revised to be in the form of a recommendation.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Amendment: this effort would work in conjunction with whatever marketing ICANN is doing to support knowledge around new gTLD program in general and the TMCH.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Not clear as drafting what is the remit of Deloitte and what falls elsewhere. Some of this should be done at an ICANN level.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Not sure involving ICANN at this level is required.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- ICANN is not involved in marketing gTLDs.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Needs to be some definition/scope. Don’t see TMCH providing education on RPMs. We also need to clarify what is meant by “education.” Is this essentially “awareness” or is something more contemplated?</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- In the end we need much more in terms of education. If it’s not in the current contract then it’s worth considering in future discussion.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Need to be careful how to express this.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- From staff: ICANN Org does not have control over the TMCH provider’s website and information. The contract was an initial 5-year term that expired on the first anniversary of the entering into force of the
new gTLD program, and followed by consecutive 1-year renewal terms unless there’s a 180 day notice of termination. See:
<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_pages_viewpage.action-3FpageId-3D61606864&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=GU7oC_LaBo7KvH3LCTYNBb2Z62O2_gB7PePpFA2YNvE&s=9vB4Yvqqu-gSbuPEj2gY7ATdZdok63vjBBtw77AvqOA&e=" target="_blank">
https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=61606864</a> . We are in the 1-year renewal term.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Should look at what Deloitte already provides on their website.
</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- There's a lot of talk about what should be done - but no-one identifying anything actually glaringly missing.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Maybe it’s more of an outreach question, if the education already exists.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- We should be identifying what’s not being done. Otherwise, we’re just endorsing education conceptually, or providing a generic roadmap for what could be done that will include many things that are already being
done.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">ACTION: Martin to revise the proposal with assistance of other WG members and circulate it on the WG email list for review.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">ACTION: Staff will check to see if either party to the contract can seek modifications.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">4. Discussion of whether individual URS proposals should be revisited by the WG, and methodology for doing so. See the draft survey at: <span> </span><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__forms.gle_kak3MEWFTNeq69wN9&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=36glY4CKyg4JCvpnCKFaXpx9PW_r5RObgdpcO0mtVM8&s=pEK5aTpdV-IIoTgVC0PHNGEZ969HY26RoiVzAAphdcw&e=" target="_blank">survey
[forms.gle]</a>:</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Survey does not designate which proposals go into the Initial Report – that will be decided via WG discussion.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- WG members should consider whether or not names and affiliations should be included, although the survey is not a poll.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- WG members will decide what to do with the data.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">-- Co-Chairs suggest allowing WG members to take the survey as a way to inform, but not direct, WG discussions.</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">ACTION: WG members are requested to continue discussion on the email list.
</span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p style="background:white; margin-bottom:12pt"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<pre style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">_______________________________________________</span></pre>
<pre style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></pre>
<pre style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">GNSO-RPM-WG mailing list</span></pre>
<pre style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></pre>
<pre style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"><a href="mailto:GNSO-RPM-WG@icann.org" target="_blank">GNSO-RPM-WG@icann.org</a></span></pre>
<pre style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></pre>
<pre style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_gnso-2Drpm-2Dwg&d=DwMDaQ&c=qmi9WrYRGQEDDOxOwKrAjW7mWovpzN_EKyRbeK_zbP0&r=Kepk-9GEB6JgOj0vUGl8c0hdrRM7FW-8Is-VAQU1VAk&m=6PdODCxx0pFS_O8Ct151GXBvBolgy6QESpwRhpAInzE&s=8FH-5Lm9_iyYjpspSNzAt2dOVuvjvZ2kyCIQh2x7n9Y&e=" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg</a></span></pre>
<pre style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></pre>
<pre style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">_______________________________________________</span></pre>
<pre style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></pre>
<pre style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US">By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMDaQ&c=qmi9WrYRGQEDDOxOwKrAjW7mWovpzN_EKyRbeK_zbP0&r=Kepk-9GEB6JgOj0vUGl8c0hdrRM7FW-8Is-VAQU1VAk&m=6PdODCxx0pFS_O8Ct151GXBvBolgy6QESpwRhpAInzE&s=j15WQS8Bnm8KeBCSUJPlw5Hdbmvws-gnr_af0NTo1s4&e=" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMDaQ&c=qmi9WrYRGQEDDOxOwKrAjW7mWovpzN_EKyRbeK_zbP0&r=Kepk-9GEB6JgOj0vUGl8c0hdrRM7FW-8Is-VAQU1VAk&m=6PdODCxx0pFS_O8Ct151GXBvBolgy6QESpwRhpAInzE&s=nykW72AfYIBMd5943mKpT4hvlgo8SdVQo0ChyyJJz_w&e=" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.</span></pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.5pt">Confidentiality Notice
<br>
<br>
This message is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This communication may contain information that is proprietary, privileged, confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure. If you are not the named addressee,
you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately either by phone (800-237-2000) or reply to this e-mail and delete all copies
of this message. </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
GNSO-RPM-WG mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:GNSO-RPM-WG@icann.org" target="_blank">GNSO-RPM-WG@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_gnso-2Drpm-2Dwg&d=DwMFaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=E43DlHk7ACc50mfXFboDNJFp2ZcSYSrqFab4sOZq47w&s=ft6Rg3e-zDDCKOd3Qrblv6JaPyWSWZZjaiN0IOMZa_M&e=" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=E43DlHk7ACc50mfXFboDNJFp2ZcSYSrqFab4sOZq47w&s=hIdE1KAH950JdZk2eyn3nlsqCB-lg2H19lr50jwxmtE&e=" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>)
and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=E43DlHk7ACc50mfXFboDNJFp2ZcSYSrqFab4sOZq47w&s=egrXYkvtv9SHOtzxAipr69RIynL7gyqy-rpqJQVOJ-w&e=" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>).
You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr"><span>_______________________________________________</span><br>
<span>GNSO-RPM-WG mailing list</span><br>
<span><a href="mailto:GNSO-RPM-WG@icann.org" target="_blank">GNSO-RPM-WG@icann.org</a></span><br>
<span><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_gnso-2Drpm-2Dwg&d=DwMFaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=guAKFjHRL80-AH2B3wx3s46wKZ2vETdwT4cNxzNuW4k&s=e8l6mpzqDRz9OiJ23leEFRVcaDwllU1AVZdi4TCT4EE&e=" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg</a></span><br>
<span>_______________________________________________</span><br>
<span>By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=guAKFjHRL80-AH2B3wx3s46wKZ2vETdwT4cNxzNuW4k&s=A0TJwZVPo-iKBGudLPEO9HZqpq-FUuOsSX8cyxetPRI&e=" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>)
and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=guAKFjHRL80-AH2B3wx3s46wKZ2vETdwT4cNxzNuW4k&s=uCxn5m-FmSqpidMTd9MaIo392qkjQXnq39LxgTpKRwU&e=" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>).
You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.</span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>