[Gnso-newgtld-wg] FW: Proposed agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 18 June 2018 at 15:00 UTC

Kris Seeburn seeburn.k at gmail.com
Tue Jun 19 16:03:51 UTC 2018


I second that proposal for panama as it would make logical sense. And personally i hope it will not be a fight but more of a casual way of finding the right path and a middle ground to move forward.

Kris

> On Jun 19, 2018, at 20:02, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info> wrote:
> 
> I’d like to support Jon here. This seems like a sensible approach. 
>  
> Jonathan
>  
> From: Jon Nevett [mailto:jon at donuts.email <mailto:jon at donuts.email>] 
> Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2018 4:11 PM
> To: Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman at comlaude.com <mailto:jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>>
> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] FW: Proposed agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 18 June 2018 at 15:00 UTC
>  
> Jeff:
>  
> There are a number of examples, like this one, where I am hearing about last minute proposed improvements to the report.  We should have the time in Panama to go through theses changes vs. on the fly now. 
>  
> I propose that we consider and make any final clarifications/improvements in Panama. We should lock down the report after Panama and then send it out for public comment.  Locking it down before Panama would only prevent us from making final clarifications and improvements necessitating comments on stale or incorrect language. Wouldn't we be better off getting comments on a better version?
>  
> Thx. 
> 
> Jon
> 
> On Jun 19, 2018, at 7:40 AM, Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman at comlaude.com <mailto:jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>> wrote:
> 
>>  <>All,
>>  
>> I think we can find a way to incorporate Kristina and Anne's comments because upon thinking about this, they are correct.  Although the Guidebook uses the term "infringe" many times, technically, the Guidebook does not use an "infringement" standard in the supporting text.  Perhaps generalizing the text to just ask if the standard that was applied was the correct one.  So how about this:
>>  
>> ·        Should the standard for the Legal Rights Objection remain the same as in the 2012 round? Please explain.
>>  
>> And we drop a footnote quoting section 3.5.2 in full as Anne did below.
>>  
>> Does that work?
>>  
>> Jeffrey J. Neuman
>> Senior Vice President |Valideus USA | Com Laude USA
>> 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600
>> Mclean, VA 22102, United States
>> E: jeff.neuman at valideus.com <mailto:jeff.neuman at valideus.com> or jeff.neuman at comlaude.com <mailto:jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>
>> T: +1.703.635.7514
>> M: +1.202.549.5079
>> @Jintlaw
>>  
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org>> On Behalf Of Rubens Kuhl
>> Sent: Monday, June 18, 2018 10:26 PM
>> To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman at lrrc.com <mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com>>
>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] FW: Proposed agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 18 June 2018 at 15:00 UTC
>>  
>> Anne,
>>  
>> The policy reads "Strings must not infringe the existing legal rights of others that are recognized or enforceable under generally accepted and internationally recognized principles of law."
>> (Source: https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/pdp-dec05-fr-parta-08aug07.htm <https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/pdp-dec05-fr-parta-08aug07.htm>)
>> Anything different than that, including AGB which was supposed to be its implementation when it does not follow policy, is a change of GNSO policy.
>>  
>> It also doesn't work picking 1 AGB reference when other 3 references in AGB say exactly what the GNSO policy says. We can't just pick references that go to one view and not the others from the same document.
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> Rubens
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> > On 18 Jun 2018, at 23:00, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman at lrrc.com <mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com>> wrote:
>> > 
>> > Rubens,
>> > This is definitely not a “change in policy” that Kristina and I are suggesting. The clear language of the AGB which codifies the grounds for the LRO  is at 3.5.2 as follows:
>> > 
>> > 3.5.2 Legal Rights Objection
>> > In interpreting and giving meaning to GNSO Recommendation 3 (“Strings 
>> > must not infringe the existing legal rights of others that are 
>> > recognized or enforceable under generally accepted and internationally 
>> > recognized principles of law”), a DRSP panel of experts presiding over 
>> > a legal rights objection will determine whether the potential use of 
>> > the applied-for gTLD by the applicant takes unfair advantage of the 
>> > distinctive character or the reputation of the objector’s registered 
>> > or unregistered trademark or service mark (“mark”) or IGO name or 
>> > acronym (as identified in the treaty establishing the organization), 
>> > or unjustifiably impairs the distinctive character or the reputation 
>> > of the objector’s mark or IGO name or acronym, or otherwise creates an 
>> > impermissible likelihood of confusion between the applied-for gTLD and 
>> > the objector’s mark or IGO name or acronym.
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
>> > Of Counsel
>> > 520.629.4428 office
>> > 520.879.4725 fax
>> > AAikman at lrrc.com <mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com>
>> > _____________________________
>> > <image003.png>
>> > Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
>> > One South Church Avenue, Suite 2000
>> > Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
>> > lrrc.com <http://lrrc.com/>
>> > 
>> > 
>> > From: Rubens Kuhl [mailto:rubensk at nic.br <mailto:rubensk at nic.br>]
>> > Sent: Monday, June 18, 2018 6:06 PM
>> > To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne
>> > Cc: Rosette, Kristina; gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
>> > Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] FW: Proposed agenda - New gTLD 
>> > Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 18 June 2018 at 15:00 UTC
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Anne and Kristina,
>> > 
>> > While we can reckon the actual standard used in 2012, we can't simply 
>> > ignore that we have
>> > - The current applicable GNSO Recommendation (3) saying infringement
>> > - Three AGB references using infringement
>> > 3.2.1 Grounds for Objection
>> > Legal Rights Objection – The applied-for gTLD string infringes the existing legal rights of the objector.
>> > 3.2.2.2 Legal Rights Objection A rightsholder has standing to file a legal rights objection. The source and documentation of the existing legal rights the objector is claiming (which may include either registered or unregistered trademarks) are infringed by the applied-for gTLD must be included in the filing.
>> > Attachment to Module 3
>> > Article 2 (e) (ii)
>> > “Existing Legal Rights Objection” refers to the objection that the 
>> > string comprising the potential new gTLD infringes the existing legal 
>> > rights of others
>> > 
>> > (not counting 3.5.2, where infringement is redefined to the criteria 
>> > actually used)
>> > 
>> > That means that in order to keep 2012 status-quo, the policy recommendation needs to be changed and AGB also needs to be changed.
>> > 
>> > What I find curious is that ICANN's own Program Implementation Review failed to acknowledge this deviation from policy, and we probably need to state that somehow. Even if the PDP finds that it was for the better, and it looks that way to me, we shouldn't miss the learning that this mistake provided.
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Rubens
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > On 18 Jun 2018, at 19:07, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman at lrrc.com <mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com>> wrote:
>> > 
>> > I support Kristina’s comments shown in the attachment and note that she also states in her comment on page 10 that the LRO in 2012 was not an “infringement” standard.  Kristina suggests in the attachment that we simply refer to the “standard used in 2012”  if we are not willing to set out the three grounds set forth in the AGB and copied again below.
>> > 
>> > This same reference to “infringement analysis” occurs on page 15 of draft Section 1.8 so the language there should be conformed to the language chosen for page 10.
>> > 
>> > Again, the standard for LRO from 2012 is as follows:
>> > 
>> > As provided for in section 3.5.2 of the ICANN Applicant Guidebook, the independent panel will determine whether the potential use of the applied-for gTLD by the applicant:
>> > (i)                 takes unfair advantage of the distinctive character or the reputation of the objector’s registered or unregistered trademark or service mark (“mark”) or IGO name or acronym, or
>> > (ii)               unjustifiably impairs the distinctive character or the reputation of the objector’s mark or IGO name or acronym, or
>> > (iii)             otherwise creates an impermissible likelihood of confusion between the applied-for gTLD and the objector’s mark or IGO name or acronym.
>> > 
>> > Anne
>> > 
>> > Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
>> > Of Counsel
>> > 520.629.4428 office
>> > 520.879.4725 fax
>> > AAikman at lrrc.com <mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com>
>> > _____________________________
>> > <image003.png>
>> > Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
>> > One South Church Avenue, Suite 2000
>> > Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
>> > lrrc.com <http://lrrc.com/>
>> > 
>> > 
>> > From: Gnso-newgtld-wg [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org>] On 
>> > Behalf Of Rosette, Kristina via Gnso-newgtld-wg
>> > Sent: Monday, June 18, 2018 7:52 AM
>> > To: gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
>> > Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] FW: Proposed agenda - New gTLD Subsequent 
>> > Procedures PDP WG - 18 June 2018 at 15:00 UTC
>> > 
>> > This time with attachment. Apologies.
>> > 
>> > 
>> > From: Rosette, Kristina
>> > Sent: Monday, June 18, 2018 10:51 AM
>> > To: gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
>> > Cc: 'Steve Chan' <steve.chan at icann.org <mailto:steve.chan at icann.org>>
>> > Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposed agenda - New gTLD Subsequent 
>> > Procedures PDP WG - 18 June 2018 at 15:00 UTC
>> > 
>> > My comments and suggestions on 1.8 attached.
>> > 
>> > From: Gnso-newgtld-wg [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org>] On 
>> > Behalf Of Steve Chan
>> > Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2018 1:25 PM
>> > To: gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
>> > Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposed agenda - New gTLD Subsequent 
>> > Procedures PDP WG - 18 June 2018 at 15:00 UTC
>> > 
>> > Dear WG Members,
>> > 
>> > With apologies for the late delivery, please find the proposed agenda for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG meeting scheduled for 18 June 2018 at 15:00 UTC, for 90 minutes.
>> > 
>> >        • Agenda Review
>> >        • Roll Call/SOIs
>> >        • Review of the Initial Report (continued). * The purpose of this review is to ensure that preliminary outcomes and deliberations are accurately captured and written in an understandable manner. The WG Co-Chairs have sought to make clear that this exercise is not intended to re-open substantive discussions, which is better served by the submission of public comments and subsequently when reviewing public comments received. Please submit your comments about these sections to the Working Group mailing list (gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>) in advance of the meeting.
>> >                • Review of Section 1.8 (Accountability Mechanisms)
>> >                • Review of Section 1.9 (Community Applications)
>> >        • Review of other sections in the Initial Report
>> >        • AOB
>> > 
>> > For Item 3, the relevant documents are attached. As a reminder, please note that a resource page has been set up on the Wiki to track the distribution of Initial Report sections, which you can find here: https://community.icann.org/x/NwUhB <https://community.icann.org/x/NwUhB>.
>> > 
>> > For Item 4, you will find a draft of most of the other sections within the Initial Report, including the Preamble and the Executive Summary. You will see a placeholder in Section 2, which states, “Insert sections from the excerpts reviewed by Working Group…” – here, staff will insert the sections we have been reviewing for the last couple of months, inclusive of any changes as needed from discussions on calls and on list.
>> > 
>> > Those signed up as Members to this PDP WG should have received meeting information from the SOAC Support team. If you did not receive these participation details or if you would like to send your apologies, please contact the SOAC Support team (gnso-secs at icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>).
>> > 
>> > Best,
>> > Steve
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Steven Chan
>> > Policy Director, GNSO Support
>> > 
>> > ICANN
>> > 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
>> > Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
>> > steve.chan at icann.org <mailto:steve.chan at icann.org>
>> > mobile: +1.310.339.4410
>> > office tel: +1.310.301.5800
>> > office fax: +1.310.823.8649
>> > 
>> > Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages.
>> > 
>> > Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO <https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO> Follow the 
>> > GNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/ <https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/>
>> > http://gnso.icann.org/en/ <http://gnso.icann.org/en/>
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.
>> > <RosetteK cmts Section 1.8 Dispute 
>> > Proceedings_7June2018.docx>___________________________________________
>> > ____
>> > Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
>> > Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
>> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg>
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.
>>  
>>  
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
>> Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg>_______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg>




Kris Seeburn
seeburn.k at gmail.com
www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/>

"Life is a Beach, it all depends at how you look at it"



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20180619/b13f2930/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: KeepItOn_Social_animated.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 51490 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20180619/b13f2930/KeepItOn_Social_animated-0001.gif>


More information about the Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list