[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Mandatory Reveal in Context of Allegations that a Domain Name is Infringing Trademark

Wed Oct 29 14:53:13 UTC 2014

Chris, 

I'm not sure what you're asking me to clarify, your second paragraph makes very little sense to me. Are you saying that, in cases where we confirm that a third party is the registrant of the domain name in question, we would be able to automatically assume that they don't have a legitimate interest in the name? TM law is fairly more complicated than that, which I'm sure you know, so I must be missing your point.

Thanks for clarifying,

Kiran

Kiran Malancharuvil 
Internet Policy Counselor
MarkMonitor
415-419-9138 (m) 

Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos. 

> On Oct 29, 2014, at 6:58 AM, Chris Pelling <chris at netearthone.com> wrote:
> 
> In the case that the requester is obviously working for the TM/copyright owner, the tm/copyright owner is asked if they have this domain in their portfolio - obviously it might not be with the requester (in your part as a registrar holding the customers domains) but surely you ask that question to them before you decide to send emails out to the registrar of record / pp provider?
> 
> I am assuming there Kiran, so, if you can confirm that MarkMonitor before sending out complaints to registrars / pp providers checks with their customer first that the domain they are alleging is in fact NOT owned by your customer ?? (with your registrar and brand protection hat on)
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Chris
> 
> NetEarth One, inc
> 
>> On 29/10/2014 11:37 AM, Kiran Malancharuvil wrote:
>> How would the requestor determine I the registrant has legitimate rights of they don't know who/what they are?
>> 
>> Kiran Malancharuvil
>> Internet Policy Counselor
>> MarkMonitor
>> 415-419-9138 (m)
>> 
>> Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos.
>> 
>>> On Oct 29, 2014, at 4:27 AM, Volker Greimann <vgreimann at key-systems.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Valeriya,
>>> 
>>> you do not seem to realize that disclosure already constitutes a violation of the privacy rights of the customer.
>>> 
>>>> Disclosure of the Customer's identity would help the Requestor determine, before having to file a URS or UDRP, whether or not the Customer:
>>>> 
>>>> -has legitimate rights in the domain name;
>>> Frankly, the requestor should try to figure this out before making the request.
>>>> All of the foregoing indicate bad faith registration and use of the domain name. As Paul pointed out on today's call, the Requestor must be able to  ascertain  this  information  before it is obliged undergo the time and expense of bringing a UDRP or other legal proceeding.  In that way, it can possibly avoid the need for a UDRP. And if it has to bring a UDRP, it can do so in good faith. That is why Disclosure is valuable in cases involving infringing domain names, not just infringing website content.
>>> All of the foregoing? Even having legitimate rights?
>>>> To address another point that has come up in the past, Disclosure does not equate to a finding of guilt. Disclosure is not a remedy of the UDRP or the URS; it would occur before a case is decided on  the merits. It is my understanding that once a UDRP is filed, one or both of the following generally happens: 1) registrar receives a request for information to confirm registrant, which it then sends to the Complainant to amend the Complaint; or 2) the P/P Provider named in the complaint discloses or publishes the information. So under the status quo, there generally is a Reveal before a decision on the merits, but only after the Requestor is forced to file a complaint, without essential information, at a high cost. As you correctly observed, not all allegations are successful -- we don't want to encourage more with a policy that requires premature legal actions.
>>> Disclosure may not equate a finding of guilt, but it does equate a violation of privacy.
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> 
>>> Volker
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Valeriya Sherman
>>>> Silverberg, Goldman & Bikoff, L.L.P.
>>>> 1101 30th Street, N.W.
>>>> Suite 120
>>>> Washington, D.C. 20007
>>>> Tel 202.944.3300
>>>> Cell 303.589.7477
>>>> vsherman at sgbdc.com<mailto:vsherman at law.gwu.edu>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org [gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] on behalf of Volker Greimann [vgreimann at key-systems.net]
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 12:37 PM
>>>> To: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Mandatory Reveal in Context of Allegations that a Domain Name is Infringing Trademark
>>>> 
>>>> Hi Phil,
>>>> 
>>>> I agree that a mere allegation is never enough for any form of required result. The bar needs to be set a lot higher, such as a sworn statement that includes legal consequences in case any part of it is incorrect that would allow the injured party and the provider to sue the pants off of the complainant.
>>>> 
>>>> Also, the violation must be clear and obvious to an untrained third party observer, which is usually not the case in trademark violation due to the fact that trademark law is simply too complex for a layman to understand. And frankly, there also is no need for an immediate reveal as there are, as you point out, already sufficient means to deal with such cases.
>>>> 
>>>> As for content, that is a hosting issue outside the realm of ICANN. Go to the hosting provider instead. Infringing content has nothing to do with the domain name whatsoever.
>>>> 
>>>> Best,
>>>> 
>>>> Volker
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Am 28.10.2014 17:30, schrieb Phil Corwin:
>>>> 
>>>> I want to reiterate the concerns I raised during today's call about recommending a policy that would require a privacy/proxy provider (PPP) to reveal/disclose a registrant's identity and contact information based on a mere allegation that the domain name is infringing a trademark.
>>>> 
>>>> ICANN has established the URDP and URS to deal with such allegations. And every day WIPO, NAF, and other providers deny complainant allegations. In fact, it appears that instances of attempted reverse domain hijacking are on the rise.
>>>> 
>>>> A registrant who is targeted in a UDRP or URS has a choice of responding (in which case they will be revealing their identity) or to default and let the provider decide the allegation based solely upon the complaint. The proposed policy would compel disclosure of registrant data even when no UDRP, URS, or trademark infringement litigation was filed, or even if the allegation was subsequently found to fail to meet the required burden of proof.
>>>> 
>>>> I am not convinced by arguments that such mandatory disclosure might facilitate resolution absent the filing of arbitration or litigation. That can be accomplished by requiring the PPP to relay a cease-and-desist letter or other communication to the registrant. Mandatory disclosure based on an unproven allegation does not further the claimed goal.
>>>> 
>>>> Summing up, I believe that our WG should not create any new policy related to allegations of TM infringement by a domain name but should leave this issue to the new gTLD RPM and UDRP review that will be commencing next spring.
>>>> 
>>>> As for allegations of trademark infringement based upon a  website's content that is a separate matter. However, I believe our discussions should recognize that PPPs are unlikely to weigh the merits of an allegation and that their likely default position will be to reveal registrant data once a complaint addresses all the relevant points required by any new policy on this subject. Given that likelihood, we should certainly consider the extent to which such a policy might be abused by a private sector or governmental actor.
>>>> 
>>>> Thank you for taking these views into account.
>>>> 
>>>> Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
>>>> Virtualaw LLC
>>>> 1155 F Street, NW
>>>> Suite 1050
>>>> Washington, DC 20004
>>>> 202-559-8597/Direct
>>>> 202-559-8750/Fax
>>>> 202-255-6172/cell
>>>> 
>>>> Twitter: @VlawDC
>>>> 
>>>> "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
>>>> 
>>>> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>>>> 
>>>> Volker A. Greimann
>>>> - Rechtsabteilung -
>>>> 
>>>> Key-Systems GmbH
>>>> Im Oberen Werk 1
>>>> 66386 St. Ingbert
>>>> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
>>>> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
>>>> Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>
>>>> 
>>>> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>
>>>> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>
>>>> 
>>>> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
>>>> www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>
>>>> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>
>>>> 
>>>> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
>>>> Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
>>>> Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
>>>> 
>>>> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
>>>> www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>
>>>> 
>>>> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
>>>> 
>>>> --------------------------------------------
>>>> 
>>>> Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
>>>> 
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Volker A. Greimann
>>>> - legal department -
>>>> 
>>>> Key-Systems GmbH
>>>> Im Oberen Werk 1
>>>> 66386 St. Ingbert
>>>> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
>>>> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
>>>> Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>
>>>> 
>>>> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>
>>>> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>
>>>> 
>>>> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
>>>> www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>
>>>> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>
>>>> 
>>>> CEO: Alexander Siffrin
>>>> Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
>>>> V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
>>>> 
>>>> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
>>>> www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>
>>>> 
>>>> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
>>> -- 
>>> Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
>>> 
>>> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>>> 
>>> Volker A. Greimann
>>> - Rechtsabteilung -
>>> 
>>> Key-Systems GmbH
>>> Im Oberen Werk 1
>>> 66386 St. Ingbert
>>> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
>>> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
>>> Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net
>>> 
>>> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
>>> www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com
>>> 
>>> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
>>> www.facebook.com/KeySystems
>>> www.twitter.com/key_systems
>>> 
>>> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
>>> Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
>>> Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
>>> 
>>> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
>>> www.keydrive.lu
>>> 
>>> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
>>> 
>>> --------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>> Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> 
>>> Volker A. Greimann
>>> - legal department -
>>> 
>>> Key-Systems GmbH
>>> Im Oberen Werk 1
>>> 66386 St. Ingbert
>>> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
>>> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
>>> Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net
>>> 
>>> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
>>> www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com
>>> 
>>> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
>>> www.facebook.com/KeySystems
>>> www.twitter.com/key_systems
>>> 
>>> CEO: Alexander Siffrin
>>> Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
>>> V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
>>> 
>>> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
>>> www.keydrive.lu
>>> 
>>> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
> 