[council] Letter from Fadi Chehade (was FW: TMCH)

Fri Dec 14 14:40:36 UTC 2012

Volker,
I don't totally agree with your position, I think that some of the changes proposed in the Strawman Solution for the TMCH are clearly implementation and not policy.  As an example, adding a 30-day notice period in advanced to the Sunrise Period doesn't change the original proposed approach for the Sunrise Period or its results.  Also, extending to 90 days the Trademark Claims period doesn't seem as a policy change.   For me these changes are just implementation changes.
The rest of the proposal does look as policy changes and in that regard a totally share your position.
This doesn't mean that I don't support the proposal; I think it has lots of merit but should go through the established processes.
Best regards,
Osvaldo Novoa

________________________________
De: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] En nombre de Volker Greimann
Enviado el: Miércoles, 12 de Diciembre de 2012 15:20
Para: Jonathan Robinson
CC: council at gnso.icann.org
Asunto: Re: [council] Letter from Fadi Chehade (was FW: TMCH)

Dear Jonathan,

I believe I have already clarified my position on these proposals. This position has been further supported by a review  of preceeding policy decisions on these matters which have shown that not only are these mostly matters of policy but also that the demands proposed by the strawman are to a very large degree in direct contradiction to previous policy decisions.

It should therefore be our position that we refer back to the earlier policy decisions on these issues and reject any changes to these positions that have not come through an established policy making process. ICANN should not be subjected to more of these suddenly policy revisions in closed backroom meetings and rather rely on its established processes.

If that means that these proposals will not be ready for prime-time at the time of the launch of the new TLDs, so be it. I cannot in my best consciousness support caving in to speciality interests to the detriment of the community of the whole, of registries, registrars and registrants.

Best,

Volker

All,

A reminder that this item is on our agenda for discussion next week.  I believe that we need to respond to Fadi in as constructive, well-considered and comprehensive a manner as possible.

Therefore, please can you personally consider the letter, the issues it raises and ensure that these are discussed with your respective groups so that you are in a position to discuss the Council's response.

Any contributions to the list in advance of December 20th most welcome.

Noting:

"I am seeking policy guidance from the GNSO Council on two items as part of the next steps for the implementation of the TMCH, namely, the Strawman Proposal and the IPC/BC proposal for limited defensive registrations"

And

"... a request from the New GTLD Program Committee's April resolution where it requested "the GNSO to consider whether additional work on defensive registrations at the second level should be undertaken"(2012.04.10.NG2)"

Thank-you.

Jonathan

From: Fadi Chehade [mailto:fadi.chehade at icann.org]
Sent: 04 December 2012 22:47
To: Jonathan Robinson
Cc: Margie Milam; David Olive
Subject: TMCH

Dear Jonathan,

As reported in my recent blog on the Trademark Clearinghouse (see: http://blog.icann.org/2012/11/a-follow-up-to-our-trademark-clearinghouse-meetings/), the recent implementation TMCH related discussions led to the development of a strawman model  to address some of the proposed improvements requested by the BC/IPC.   I am very pleased with the efforts shown by the participants in these discussions, as they reflect a willingness to explore improvements to the TMCH and the rights protection mechanisms available in new GTLDs.

I am seeking policy guidance from the GNSO Council on two items as part of the next steps for the implementation of the TMCH, namely, the Strawman Proposal and the IPC/BC proposal for limited defensive registrations.   Each of these documents are posted for public comment (see:http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/tmch-strawman-30nov12-en.htm) to allow the ICANN community the opportunity to comment on these proposals.  Specifically, policy guidance is sought on the portion that pertains to the expansion of the scope of the trademark claims, although comments on any aspect of the Strawman Model is welcome in the event the Council is interested in broadening its response.  The specific proposal is that:

Where there are domain labels that have been found to be the subject of previous abusive registrations (e.g., as a result of a UDRP or court proceeding), a limited number (up to 50) of these may be added to a Clearinghouse record (i.e., these names would be mapped to an existing record for which the trademark has already been verified by the Clearinghouse).  Attempts to register these as domain names will generate the Claims notices as well as the notices to the rights holder.

Not included in the Strawman Model is the IPC/BC proposal for a limited preventative registrations.  In general, there was not support among non-IPC/BC participants for solutions to the issue of second level defensive registrations among the participants in the TMCH meetings.   After hearing concerns regarding this issue, members of the IPC/BC provided a description of a preventative mechanism, the "Limited Preventative Registration," which has also been published for public comment.    As this issue is relevant to a request from the New GTLD Program Committee's April resolution where it requested "the GNSO to consider whether additional work on defensive registrations at the second level should be undertaken"(2012.04.10.NG2), I am seeking GNSO Council feedback on this IPC/BC proposal as well.

It would be ideal if the GNSO Council could take up these issues at its December meeting.

Finally, addressing some of the criticisms on the process used by Staff in convening these meetings, I hope that you can appreciate that Staff is not circumventing the GNSO processes. The Strawman Model and my blog posting always clarified that this request to the GNSO Council was coming.  One of my goals as CEO is to enhance collaboration in the ICANN community as it tackles difficult issues.   I truly believe that the development of strawman proposals on this and other issues can be a useful tool to inform policy and implementation discussions.   I hope that you will consider this request in that light.

We look forward to the Council's reply to this request.

Best Personal Regards,

Fadi Chehade
President and CEO
ICANN

--

Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

Volker A. Greimann

- Rechtsabteilung -

Key-Systems GmbH

Im Oberen Werk 1

66386 St. Ingbert

Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901

Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851

Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>

Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>

www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>

Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:

www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>

www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>

Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin

Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken

Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534

Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP

www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>

Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.

--------------------------------------------

Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Best regards,

Volker A. Greimann

- legal department -

Key-Systems GmbH

Im Oberen Werk 1

66386 St. Ingbert

Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901

Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851

Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>

Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>

www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>

Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:

www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>

www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>

CEO: Alexander Siffrin

Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken

V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534

Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP

www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>

This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.

________________________________
El presente correo y cualquier posible archivo adjunto está dirigido únicamente al destinatario del mensaje y contiene información que puede ser confidencial. Si Ud. no es el destinatario correcto por favor notifique al remitente respondiendo anexando este mensaje y elimine inmediatamente el e-mail y los posibles archivos adjuntos al mismo de su sistema. Está prohibida cualquier utilización, difusión o copia de este e-mail por cualquier persona o entidad que no sean las específicas destinatarias del mensaje. ANTEL no acepta ninguna responsabilidad con respecto a cualquier comunicación que haya sido emitida incumpliendo nuestra Política de Seguridad de la Información

This e-mail and any attachment is confidential and is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not intended recipient please inform the sender immediately, answering this e-mail and delete it as well as the attached files. Any use, circulation or copy of this e-mail by any person or entity that is not the specific addressee(s) is prohibited. ANTEL is not responsible for any communication emitted without respecting our Information Security Policy.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20121214/9013e7e7/attachment.html>