[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [Ext] COMMENT Re: Notes & Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Work Track 5 - 10 July 2019

[Julie Hedlund]

Dear Christopher,

Thank you very much for that helpful clarification.

Kind regards,
Julie

From: "lists at christopherwilkinson.eu" <lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>
Date: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 at 1:32 PM
To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund at icann.org>
Cc: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
Subject: [Ext] COMMENT Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Notes & Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Work Track 5 - 10 July 2019




On 10 Jul 2019, at 18:38, Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund at icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org>> wrote:

- Should be looking at which geographical terms, as defined, are not protected.  You can’t define the non-AGB terms -- that is the universe.  You can try to define the terms you are trying NOT to protect.


Hello:  There is a misunderstanding in the above text as it appears to be a summary of what I said in this afternoon’s call:

The purpose of the proposal is to reverse the burden of proof.  All geographical terms would be protected or reserved with the _exception_ of those explicitly NOT protected. Since I had to leave the call early, I would add that the latter might include grandfathering past mistakes, some of which were referred to during the call.

Regards

CW



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5/attachments/20190710/08816283/attachment.html>