[Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] FW: Suggestions and revisions to proposed letter

[Paul Keating]

From:  Paul Keating <paul at law.es>
Date:  Wednesday, June 10, 2015 2:10 PM
To:  Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org>
Cc:  Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com>
Subject:  Suggestions and revisions to proposed letter

> Dear Mary and Phil,
> 
> Thank you for sending out the original.  It obviously shows a great deal of
> work.   Please do not consider my suggestions as an affront to the hard work
> that went into the original draft.
> 
> Attached please find my suggested revisions to the proposed letter seeking
> legal advice.  In most cases I was attempting to provide more specificity and
> avoid any expression pif  opinion other than the historical consensus of the
> WG.  For example, we have no direct communications from IGOs regarding this
> issue.  Instead we are relying entirely upon what ICANN has told us that they
> have said to the GAC.
> 
> In other matters,  I have imbedded several comments but not in each instance.
> 
> For example, I removed much of the part about the Ter-6 process.  First, under
> the UDRP/URS, a complainant need only show a trademark in 1 jurisdiction.
> Thus it is not relevant that the US, for example, may not recognize an IGO
> trademark ­ it is sufficient if one Convention signatory does.  Second, the
> process by which WIPO notifies, etc is not really germane to the immunity
> issue.
> 
> I have also removed the language referencing any "appeal" as the UDRP has no
> such mechanism and the "appeal" process in the URS is purely internal in
> nature and is not relevant to the issue of litigation immunity.
> 
> I have also removed the language referencing post-UDRP litigation as rare.
> This should not enter into the scope of our assessment.
> 
> As to the questions, I had some major issues in that they seemed to be
> extremely leading in nature and structured in a way that would encourage "book
> writing" and not the more pointed advice we are seeking.
> 
> The attached is redlined and the specific changes can be seen by altering the
> presentation  format of the document.  I would appreciate your circulating
> this among the WG members.
> 
> There are lots of suggested changes and I hope it is not all overboard.  I am
> reminded of the joke that given the Bible and a red pen, any lawyer will make
> changesŠŠŠŠŠ.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Paul Raynor Keating, Esq.
> 
> Law.es <http://law.es/>
> 
> Tel. +34 93 368 0247 (Spain)
> 
> Tel. +44.7531.400.177 (UK)
> Tel. +1.415.937.0846 (US)
> 
> Fax. (Europe) +34 93 396 0810
> 
> Fax. (US)(415) 358.4450
> 
> Skype: Prk-Spain
> 
> email:  Paul at law.es
> 
>  
> 
> THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY CONTAIN
> INFORMATION SUBJECT TO THE ATTORNEY/CLIENT OR WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGE.  THE
> INFORMATION IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHOM
> IT IS ADDRESSED.  IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, NO WAIVER OF
> PRIVILEGE IS MADE OR INTENDED AND YOU ARE REQUESTED TO  PLEASE DELETE THE
> EMAIL AND ANY ATTACHMENTS.
> 
>  
> 
> Circular 230 Disclosure: To assure compliance with Treasury Department rules
> governing tax practice, we hereby inform you that any advice contained herein
> (including in any attachment) (1) was not written or intended to be used, and
> cannot be used, by you or any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding any
> penalties that may be imposed on you or any taxpayer and (2) may not be used
> or referred to by you or any other person in connection with promoting,
> marketing or recommending to another person any transaction or matter
> addressed herein.
> 
>  
> 
> NOTHING CONTAINED IN THIS EMAIL SHALL CONSTITUTE THE FORMATION OF AN
> ATTORNEY/CLIENT RELATIONSHIP; SUCH A RELATIONSHIP MAY BE FORMED WITH THIS FIRM
> AND ATTORNEY ONLY BY SEPARATE FORMAL WRITTEN ENGAGEMENT AGREEMENT, WHICH THIS
> IS NOT.  IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH AN AGREEMENT, NOTHING CONTAINED HEREIN SHALL
> CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE
>  


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/attachments/20150610/513a4588/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Background Questions for Legal Expert on IGO Immunity - as reviewed by WG co-chairs.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 56887 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/attachments/20150610/513a4588/BackgroundQuestionsforLegalExpertonIGOImmunity-asreviewedbyWGco-chairs-0001.docx>