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

[George Kirikos]

I generally agree with the proposed revisions suggested by Paul
Keating. A few small tweaks might be:

1. page 1: the UDRP Rules have been updated slightly since 1999, to
reflect electronic filing and to clarify locking of domains during a
dispute, so the link should be to either:

https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/rules-be-2012-02-25-en (current)

or

https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/udrp-rules-2015-03-11-en (which
takes effect shortly)

2. one might add on page 2, in addition to "without in-person hearings
or oral testimony", that it's without Discovery and without
cross-examinations of parties/witnesses, either.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
416-588-0269
http://www.leap.com/



On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Paul Keating <Paul at law.es> wrote:
>
>
> 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 changes…………….
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Paul Raynor Keating, Esq.
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list
> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp