<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Thank you, Mary and Staff, and hello, everyone. </div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div>I appreciate the opportunity. For clarity and focus, I narrowed the bullet points to the following: </div><div><br></div><div><ul dir="auto"><li><font size="4">Following the UDRP of a winning IGO Complainant, the current proposal - that a losing Respondent must choose between going to court or agreeing to arbitration - is not a fair choice. This is why: Per the current proposal, should the Respondent choose to go to court, and the court dismisses the case on non-substantive (i.e., jurisdictional) grounds, the current proposal would bar the Respondent from accessing and utilizing the arbitration mechanism to seek substantive, merit-based relief. This is especially impactful to Respondents when considering the corresponding proposal to remove the Mutual Jurisdiction Requirement for IGOs. Such a configuration would seem to unfairly coerce losing Respondents to “choose" arbitration, otherwise risking that the Respondent could be left without a remedy. </font></li><li><font size="4">While the UDRP has been and is successful in thwarting bad actors, there have been and are controversial UDRP decisions that have resulted in domain names being canceled or transferred away from legitimate, good faith Respondents (businesses, organizations, as well as individuals). These legitimate, good faith Respondents have and do rely on the due process protections that a court provides, such as the ability to appeal and other built-in checks and balances, to ensure fairness. </font></li><li><font size="4">In the original IGO/INGO PDP Working Group, there had been a proposal that the option to arbitrate remains available after there has been a judicial proceeding in which the court finds that the IGO is jurisdictionally immune. This preserves the ability to obtain a substantive decision on the merits of a Respondent's case, should the immunity question be decided in favor of the IGO Complainant. This proposal does not alter the opportunity for the parties to agree to go straight to arbitration, nor does it affect the ability of a Respondent who has no cause of action in their (or their registrar's) jurisdiction from choosing to go straight to arbitration. </font></li></ul></div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">Again, thank you. <br><div><br></div><div><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><font face="Arial" style="font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span style="font-size:13.6364px;font-family:Arial">Sincerely,</span></font></div><div dir="ltr"><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><font style="font-family:Helvetica;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><font face="Arial" style="font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><font style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Jay Chapman</span><b style="font-family:Arial"><br></b></font></font></font></span></span></span></span></span></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><br></div></div></div></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 1:58 PM Mary Wong via gnso-igo-wt <<a href="mailto:gnso-igo-wt@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-igo-wt@icann.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Dear all,<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Staff had two action items from this past Monday’s IGO Work Track call: (1) to provide a summary of the concerns that Jay Chapman, on behalf of the BC, had expressed on the call; and (2) to update the draft recommendations document based
on suggestions and discussions during the call. We’ve completed both items, as further described below.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u>On action item (1)</u>:<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Jay’s intervention was based on the GNSO Council’s directions when creating the Work Track; i.e., address the issues with the original IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights PDP’s Recommendation #5 by finding a solution that recognizes IGO
immunities and privileges while preserving a registrant’s right and ability to have a UDRP panel decision reviewed on the merits. As requested, here is the summary of the concerns Jay outlined on the call – Jay and others, please let us know if this is not
accurate:<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li style="margin-left:0in">Removing the requirement for an IGO Complainant to agree to submit to a Mutual Jurisdiction when filing a UDRP complaint results in a “false choice” for a losing registrant as between
going to court and agreeing to arbitration. By removing the Mutual Jurisdiction requirement for IGOs, a registrant is essentially left without a remedy should a court rule that it cannot hear the case due to the IGO’s having immunity from the jurisdiction
of that court. <u></u><u></u></li><li style="margin-left:0in">There have been controversial UDRP decisions and cases of reverse domain name hijacking (RDNH) that have resulted in domain names being canceled or transferred away from legitimate,
good faith registrants. Registrants rely on the due process protections that a court provides, such as the ability to appeal and other built-in checks and balances, to ensure fairness.<u></u><u></u></li><li style="margin-left:0in">The current Work Track proposal allows an IGO Complainant to select the forum (staff note: presumably, by selecting the UDRP dispute resolution provider to file its case with) and
have the proceeding decided by panelist(s) who are almost exclusively trademark practitioners. Requiring the registrant to choose between arbitration and going to court in these circumstances would appear to be the kind of situation that a judge may wish to
review (in the absence of the immunity issue). <u></u><u></u></li><li style="margin-left:0in">In the original PDP Working Group, there had been a suggestion that the option to arbitrate remains available after there has been a judicial proceeding in which the court finds that
the IGO is jurisdictionally immune. This alternative seems to preserve the ability to obtain a substantive decision on the merits of a registrant’s case, should the immunity question be decided in favor of the IGO Complainant.<u></u><u></u></li></ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u>On action item (2)</u>:<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Staff has updated the group’s working document: <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GHfvQzZG8s6BdgUsHm3KoyWtRcPO1EYU/view?usp=sharing" target="_blank">
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GHfvQzZG8s6BdgUsHm3KoyWtRcPO1EYU/view?usp=sharing</a>. I’m also attaching a Word version in case you are not able to access or view the Google Doc. Since the Google Doc now contains comments and redlined updates from the past
two weeks, it may be somewhat difficult to read. For your convenient reference, you will find the additions and edits made by staff as a result of Monday’s call toward the bottom of Page 3 and continuing on Page 4.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks and cheers<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Steve, Berry & Mary<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div style="border-style:solid none none;border-top-width:1pt;padding:3pt 0in 0in;border-top-color:rgb(181,196,223)">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">From: </span></b><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">gnso-igo-wt <<a href="mailto:gnso-igo-wt-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-igo-wt-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of Berry Cobb via gnso-igo-wt <<a href="mailto:gnso-igo-wt@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-igo-wt@icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Reply-To: </b>Berry Cobb <<a href="mailto:Berry.Cobb@icann.org" target="_blank">Berry.Cobb@icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Thursday, July 29, 2021 at 2:07 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>"<a href="mailto:gnso-igo-wt@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-igo-wt@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:gnso-igo-wt@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-igo-wt@icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>[gnso-igo-wt] Agenda RPM - IGO Curative Rights Work Track for 2 Aug 2021 15:00 UTC Meeting<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Dear RPM - IGO Curative Rights Work Track,<br>
<br>
Please see below the proposed agenda for the meeting scheduled on <b style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">2 Aug 2021 15:00 </b>UTC.<u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u><u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u></span></p>
<ul type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal">
Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes)<span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u><u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u></span></li><li class="MsoNormal">
Welcome & Chair updates (Chair) (10 minutes)<span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u><u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u></span></li><li class="MsoNormal">
Continued Discussion of Working Proposal (70 minutes)<span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif">
<u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u><u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u></span>
<ul type="circle">
<li class="MsoNormal">
Link to Proposed Recommendations Doc: <span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GHfvQzZG8s6BdgUsHm3KoyWtRcPO1EYU/edit" style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif" target="_blank">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GHfvQzZG8s6BdgUsHm3KoyWtRcPO1EYU/edit</a> (PDF attached)<u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u><u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u></span></li></ul>
</li><li class="MsoNormal">
Next steps & closing (5 minutes)<span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif">
<u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u><u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u></span>
<ul type="circle">
<li class="MsoNormal">
Next meeting 09 August 2021 @ 15:00 UTC<span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u><u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u></span></li></ul>
</li></ul>
<p><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Action Items:<u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u><u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u></span></p>
<ul type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Brian to add his proposed redlines to the Google doc - COMPLETE - Note, staff created the next version in a new google doc, link provided above. The old version has been closed.<u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u><u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u></span></li><li class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Staff to prepare next draft of working proposal - IN PROGRESS - Staff awaits Brian's action to be completed.<u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u><u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u></span></li><li class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Staff to update flowchart - COMPLETE; Updated chart added to google doc, and also attached here.<u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u><u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u></span></li><li class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Brian to propose edits Rec #2 regarding selection of law for arbitration - IN PROGRESS<u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u><u style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></u></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><br>
<br>
Sincerely,<br>
<br>
GNSO Policy Staff</span><span style="border:1pt solid windowtext;padding:0in"><img border="0" width="32" height="32" style="width: 0.3333in; height: 0.3333in;" id="gmail-m_-2179177942164973282gmail-m_-3474596963657766792gmail-m_-6350646923321768268m_-9117195318806717592gmail-m_-4333151689148950917_x0000_i1025" alt="Image removed by sender."></span>
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
gnso-igo-wt mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:gnso-igo-wt@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-igo-wt@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-wt" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-wt</a><br>
<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://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" rel="noreferrer" 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.</blockquote></div>
</div>