[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI - Proposed language on attestation - a few new words

Sat Apr 11 08:31:28 UTC 2015

Hi Kiran,

The ability of the requester to act.

Let me give you a real world example, this happened in June 2011 and was a request with regards IP etc.

We received a request from "Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP" to take down a site, based upon a DMCA / notice of infringement / malware spreading on the apple brand.

I honestly did not know Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP from any other lawyer, and subsequently went into a dialogue with them - within 24 hours the domain was shut down.

I requested 2 things, first and foremost full indemnity from Apple with regards this domain name, AND, confirmation that Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP act on behalf of Apple.

One letter later, signed by Ron Dumont, Apple Product Security and Policy.

Ron was also kind enough to stipulate WHO could sign on their behalf in the document.

So, I will always go down this route if I have never heard of, or, cannot easily find from the companies website (the IP owner) on their copyright page, who acts on their behalf.

Kind regards,

Chris

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kiran Malancharuvil" <Kiran.Malancharuvil at markmonitor.com>
To: "Chris Pelling" <chris at netearth.net>
Cc: "Valeriya Sherman" <vsherman at sgrlaw.com>, gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
Sent: Saturday, 11 April, 2015 12:46:02 AM
Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI - Proposed language on attestation - a few new words

What are you attempting to validate? The honesty of the requestor or the ability of the requestor to act specifically on behalf of the client they are representing for that specific request? 

Where does this end? If we submit a request that establishes who we are acting on behalf of, you don't believe us. If we submit another document asserting that again, will that be the end? Or will we be suspect in regard to that document?

This whole conversation is reaching a point of ridiculous. 

Kiran 

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

Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos. 

> On Apr 10, 2015, at 4:41 PM, Chris Pelling <chris at netearth.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi Val,
> 
> I would request it as a "standard practice" when we meet a new requester, then add it to our files as a confirmed requester.  In our case as we would be directly responsible, better to be safe than sorry, if that means an extra piece of paper and/or email then so be it.  I will always "err on the side of caution".
> 
> Obviously we do not get many of these requests, so, building up our files will take time when we get contacted, however, other far larger registrars may already have those connections in place.
> 
> Regards,
> Chris
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Valeriya Sherman" <vsherman at sgrlaw.com>
> To: chris at netearth.net
> Cc: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
> Sent: Saturday, 11 April, 2015 12:02:25 AM
> Subject: RE: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI - Proposed language on attestation - a few new words
> 
> That is the point of the attestation language we previously discussed, whereby the Requestor--under the penalty of perjury--attests for you that he/she has the authority to make the request.  And if you reasonably believe that, despite the repercussions from making a false attestation under the penalty of perjury, they do not have the authorization they claim, you can ask them to show some proof of it.
> 
> 
> 
> Valeriya  Sherman | Attorney at Law
> 
> 202-973-2611 Phone
> 202-263-4326 Fax
> www.sgrlaw.com
> vsherman at sgrlaw.com
> 
> 1055 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W.
> Suite 400
> Washington, D.C. 20007
> 
> Ms. Sherman's practice is limited to matters before federal courts and before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
> She is not admitted in the District of Columbia.
> 
> Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Pelling [mailto:chris at netearth.net]
> Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 6:25 PM
> To: Sherman, Valeriya
> Cc: Graeme Bunton; gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI - Proposed language on attestation - a few new words
> 
> Hi Val,
> 
> I have a small point to make on "Requestor is unauthorized to act on behalf of the rights holder" how are we as the provider supposed to know that XYZ acts on behalf of Apple inc ?
> 
> In my case, I would simply go on the stance, request the confirmation, then once received continue the process.  Also then note in our records XYZ acts on behalf if Apple, and should we not get another request from the requester for another year - get a "refreshing" confirmation.
> 
> Chris
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Valeriya Sherman" <vsherman at sgrlaw.com>
> To: "Graeme Bunton" <gbunton at tucows.com>, gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
> Sent: Friday, 10 April, 2015 9:57:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI - Proposed language on attestation - a few new words
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, Kathy for this language. It is a positive step in the right direction. We would like to propose a slight variation to it:
> 
> 
> 
> d) Where the signatory is not the rights holder, an officer of the rights holder (if a corporate entity) or an attorney of the rights holder, and the Provider has a reasonable basis to believe that the Requestor is unauthorized to act on behalf of the rights holder, the Provider may request, and the Requestor shall provide, sufficient proof of agency.
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to hear others’ thoughts on this.
> 
> 
> 
> Val
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Valeriya Sherman | Attorney at Law
> 
> 
> 202-973-2611 phone
> 202-263-4326 fax
> www.sgrlaw.com
> vsherman at sgrlaw.com
> 
> 
> 1055 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W.
> Suite 400
> Washington, D.C. 20007
> 
> 
> Ms. Sherman's practice is limited to matters before federal courts and before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
> She is not admitted in the District of Columbia.
> 
> 
> Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Graeme Bunton
> Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 4:20 PM
> To: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI - Proposed language on attestation - a few new words
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Kathy,
> 
> Originally, I had concerns about this, similar to what Michele was expressing on the call.
> 
> In talking with our compliance team, it sounds like they have, for a new or unknown requester that's a third party, attempted to verify the relationship between them and the rights holder.
> 
> The below language seems reasonable to me, and I wouldn't think it would generate anything that doesn't already exist. Having it available may even make requests more efficient.
> 
> Graeme
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 2015-04-10 3:14 PM, Kathy Kleiman wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Todd and All,
> 
> It sounds like we all agree that the requester must have the rights holders' authorization to make the submit the reveal request, make the infringement allegation and bind the rights holder to the limitations on the revealed data. For rights holders, that agency will be reflected in a document -- an agency agreement (or equivalent). That's all we're asking for -- the ability to see it if there are questions. We circulated some longer language earlier, but have been reviewing it. Building on Val's language, it may now boil down to a few additional words. They are below (in italics) and attached in the Reveal Policy (using the text by Mary for our meeting last Tues):
> 
> 
> 
> -----------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Confidentiality Notice
> This message is being sent by or on behalf of a lawyer. It is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This communication may contain information that is proprietary, privileged or confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete all copies of the message.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
> 
> ________________________________
> Confidentiality Notice
> This message is being sent by or on behalf of a lawyer. It is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This communication may contain information that is proprietary, privileged or confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete all copies of the message.
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg