<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)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"MS Gothic";
panose-1:2 11 6 9 7 2 5 8 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@MS Gothic";
panose-1:2 11 6 9 7 2 5 8 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-style-priority:99;
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
p.xmsonormal, li.xmsonormal, div.xmsonormal
{mso-style-name:x_msonormal;
mso-style-priority:99;
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.xmsolistparagraph, li.xmsolistparagraph, div.xmsolistparagraph
{mso-style-name:x_msolistparagraph;
mso-style-priority:99;
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.xmsonormal0, li.xmsonormal0, div.xmsonormal0
{mso-style-name:x_msonormal0;
mso-style-priority:99;
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.xxmsolistparagraph, li.xxmsolistparagraph, div.xxmsolistparagraph
{mso-style-name:x_xmsolistparagraph;
mso-style-priority:99;
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.xmsochpdefault, li.xmsochpdefault, div.xmsochpdefault
{mso-style-name:x_msochpdefault;
mso-style-priority:99;
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.xmsohyperlink
{mso-style-name:x_msohyperlink;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.xmsohyperlinkfollowed
{mso-style-name:x_msohyperlinkfollowed;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.xemailstyle20
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle20;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle22
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle22;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle23
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle23;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle24
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle24;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle25
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle25;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle26
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle26;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle27
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle27;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle28
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle28;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle29
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle29;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle30
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle30;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle31
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle31;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle32
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle32;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle33
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle33;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle34
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle34;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle35
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle35;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle36
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle36;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle37
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle37;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle38
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle38;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle39
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle39;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle40
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle40;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle41
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle41;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle42
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle42;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xemailstyle43
{mso-style-name:x_emailstyle43;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.xapple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:x_apple-converted-space;}
span.EmailStyle50
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;}
span.EmailStyle53
{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:70.85pt 70.85pt 70.85pt 70.85pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>+100<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><span style='color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='color:black'>GNSO-RPM-WG <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Kathy Kleiman <kathy@kathykleiman.com><br><b>Date: </b>Wednesday, October 23, 2019 at 5:24 PM<br><b>To: </b><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<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><p style='margin-left:.5in'>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.<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'>Kathy (with my hat as member of the STI)<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>On 10/23/2019 10:52 AM, Marie Pattullo wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'>Thanks, Julie. I’m about to go into a call so apologies for the hit & run response, but initial thoughts inline:</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'>Para one: </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'>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 style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:red'>Access to the database would allow misuse, including by bad actors and/or competitors. </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'>On the other hand, some Working Group members have noted <span style='background:yellow;mso-highlight: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 style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:red;background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow'>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 style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:red'> </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'> 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 style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:red'>If it’s a legitimate use, then brand holders won’t stop them.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'>The Working Group agrees in principle that an audit of the Trademark Clearinghouse database can be beneficial. </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:red'>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 style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'>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 style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:red'>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><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> GNSO-RPM-WG <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org"><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"><julie.hedlund@icann.org></a>; <a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">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><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'>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><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'>The description "n</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#201F1E;background:white'>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><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'>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><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div id=Signature><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif'>Rebecca Tushnet</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif'>Frank Stanton Professor of First Amendment Law, Harvard Law School<br>703 593 6759 </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-left:.5in;text-align:center'><hr size=0 width="100%" align=center></div><div id=divRplyFwdMsg><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'> GNSO-RPM-WG <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <<a href="mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org">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">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a> <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">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> <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Dear WG members,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'>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.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Kind regards,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Mary, Ariel, and Julie<o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><u>Staff-suggested draft (based on Working Group discussions and suggestions made on the Working Group call of 16 October)</u>:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'>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.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'>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.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>GNSO-RPM-WG <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <<a href="mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org">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">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>[GNSO-RPM-WG] Actions & Notes: RPM PDP WG Meeting 16 October 2019</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>Dear All,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in;font-variant-caps:normal;orphans:auto;text-align:start;widows:auto;word-spacing:0px'><span style='color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in;font-variant-caps:normal;orphans:auto;text-align:start;widows:auto;word-spacing:0px'><span style='color:black'>Please see below the action items captured by staff from the<span class=xapple-converted-space> </span></span>RPM PDP Working Group<span style='color:black'> call held on</span> 16 October 2019 at 17:00 UTC<span style='color:black'>. Staff </span>will post<span style='color:black'> these to the wiki space. <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, Zoom chat,</span> transcript<span style='color:black'> and attendance records are posted on the wiki<span class=xapple-converted-space> </span>at</span>: <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=">https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/2019-10-16+Review+of+all+Rights+Protection+Mechanisms+%28RPMs%29+in+all+gTLDs+PDP+WG</a>. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>Best Regards,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in;font-variant-caps:normal;orphans:auto;text-align:start;widows:auto;word-spacing:0px'>Julie<o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in;font-variant-caps:normal;orphans:auto;text-align:start;widows:auto;word-spacing:0px'>Julie Hedlund, Policy Director<o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>==</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b>NOTES & ACTION ITEMS</b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><span style='color:black'>Actions:</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b>Open and Deferred TMCH Questions:</b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><u><span style='color:black'>Q7 Design Marks</span></u><span style='color:black'>: ACTION: WG agrees to publish Kleiman/Muscovitch and Shatan proposals in the Initial Report for Public Comment.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><u><span style='color:black'>Q8 GIs: ACTION</span></u><span style='color:black'>: WG agrees to publish Tushnet proposal in the Initial Report for Public Comment.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><u><span style='color:black'>Q12</span></u><span style='color:black'>: 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><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><u><span style='color:black'>Q15</span></u><span style='color:black'>: 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><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><u><span style='color:black'>Q2</span></u><span style='color:black'>: 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><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><span style='color:black'>Discussion of whether individual URS proposals should be revisited by the WG, and methodology for doing so: </span></b><span style='color:black'>ACTION: WG members are requested to continue discussion on the email list. See the draft survey at: <span class=xapple-converted-space> </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=">survey [forms.gle]</a>.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b>Notes:</b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>1. Updates to Statements of Interest: No updates provided.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>2. Status of Questions Q7, Q8, Q12, and Q15:</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>Q7 Design Marks: ACTION: WG agrees to publish Kleiman/Muscovitch and Shatan proposals in the Initial Report for Public Comment.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>Q8 GIs: ACTION: WG agrees to publish Tushnet proposal in the Initial Report for Public Comment.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>Q12: Proposal from Maxim Alzoba – TMCH Operational Considerations</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- Need to improve redundancy and availability of the TMCH.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- 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><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- 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><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- 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://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=61606864">https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=61606864</a></span><span style='font-family:"MS Gothic";color:black'>
</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>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><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>Q15: ACTION: WG agrees to publish Karanicolas proposal in the Initial Report for Public Comment.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- Hoped that we could get consensus. </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- 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><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- 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><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>ACTION: Staff to draft a new proposal based on suggestions and circulate it to interested WG members and the Co-Chairs.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>3. Remaining Deferred Charter Questions (see the attached Status of WG Discussions on Agreed TMCH Charter Questions):</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><i><span style='color:black'> </span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><i><span style='color:black'>a. Close Discussion:</span></i></b><span class=xapple-converted-space><span style='color:black'> </span></span><span style='color:black'>TMCH Category 6: Balance: Charter Question 16: Close discussion.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><i><span style='color:black'>b. Discussion:</span></i></b><span class=xapple-converted-space><span style='color:black'> </span></span><span style='color:black'>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=">1 Oct 2019</a>) </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><i><span style='color:black'> </span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>Q1: Close discussion.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>Q2: Proposal from Martin Pablo Silva Valent:</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- TMCH should educate rights holders; it is already doing outreach and should do more.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- Needs to be revised to be in the form of a recommendation.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- 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><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- 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><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- Not sure involving ICANN at this level is required.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- ICANN is not involved in marketing gTLDs.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- 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><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- 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><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- Need to be careful how to express this.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- 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=">https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=61606864</a> . We are in the 1-year renewal term.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- Should look at what Deloitte already provides on their website. </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- There's a lot of talk about what should be done - but no-one identifying anything actually glaringly missing.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- Maybe it’s more of an outreach question, if the education already exists.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- 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><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>ACTION: Martin to revise the proposal with assistance of other WG members and circulate it on the WG email list for review.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>ACTION: Staff will check to see if either party to the contract can seek modifications.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>4. Discussion of whether individual URS proposals should be revisited by the WG, and methodology for doing so. See the draft survey at: <span class=xapple-converted-space> </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=">survey [forms.gle]</a>:</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- Survey does not designate which proposals go into the Initial Report – that will be decided via WG discussion.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- WG members should consider whether or not names and affiliations should be included, although the survey is not a poll.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- WG members will decide what to do with the data.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>-- Co-Chairs suggest allowing WG members to take the survey as a way to inform, but not direct, WG discussions.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='color:black'>ACTION: WG members are requested to continue discussion on the email list. </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=xmsonormal style='margin-left:.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'><br><br><o:p></o:p></span></p><pre style='margin-left:.5in'>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:.5in'>GNSO-RPM-WG mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:.5in'><a href="mailto:GNSO-RPM-WG@icann.org">GNSO-RPM-WG@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:.5in'><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:.5in'>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:.5in'>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://www.icann.org/privacy/policy">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos">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.<o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>_______________________________________________ GNSO-RPM-WG mailing list GNSO-RPM-WG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg _______________________________________________ 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 (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). 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.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></body></html>