[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Fwd: Requester jurisdiction - Agreed Changes Needed to Final Report

[Kathy Kleiman]

Hi All,
Currently, and unfortunately, the final report does not reflect the 
agreement of the WG on the jurisdictional issues. I trust this can be 
corrected quickly -- and to that end I outline the "fixes" below. I 
write this atop the message circulated by Chris in which the original 
language was circulated, and its rationale explained. This set of 
changes was accepted by the WG on our last call, as I am sure everyone 
remembers.

*Bold shows the additions we agreed to.  (Note: formatting is not 
perfect, but text and numbering are correct...)*

Please note that four (4) sections have changes below - 3 are in the 
Request templates and 1 is in Annex 1, the Jurisdiction paragraph (at 
the end of our document).

Best, Kathy
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annex B

*II. Request templates for Disclosure*

*A. Where a domain name allegedly infringes a trademark*


6(c) Agrees that *Requester and *the trademark holder will submit, 
without prejudice to other potentially applicable jurisdictions, to the 
jurisdiction of the courts (1) where it is incorporated (or of its home 
address, if an individual), AND (2) where the Provider specifies on its 
request form, solely for disputes arising from alleged improper 
disclosures caused by knowingly false statements made by the Requester, 
or from Requester’s and/or trademark holder’s knowing misuse of 
information disclosed to it in response to its request.

*B. Domain name resolves to website where copyright is allegedly infringed*

                 7(d)Agrees that the *Requester and *copyright holder 
will submit, without prejudice to other potentially applicable 
jurisdictions, to the jurisdiction of the courts (1) where it is 
incorporated (or of its home address, if an individual), AND (2) where 
the Provider specifies on its request form, solely for disputes arising 
from alleged improper disclosures caused by knowingly false statements 
made by the Requester, or from Requester’s and/or copyright holder’s 
knowing misuse of information disclosed to it in response to its request.


*C. Domain name resolves to website where trademark is allegedly infringed*

                 6(c) Agrees that the *Requester and *trademark holder 
will submit, without prejudice to other potentially applicable 
jurisdictions, to the jurisdiction of the courts (1) where it is 
incorporated (or of its home address, if an individual), AND (2) where 
the Provider specifies on its request form, solely for disputes arising 
from alleged improper disclosures caused by knowingly false statements 
made by the Requester, or from Requester’s and/or the trademark holder’s 
knowing misuse of information disclosed to it in response to its request./
/

*Annex 1 To Disclosure Framework: Resolving Disputes Arising From 
Disclosures Made As A Result Of Allegedly Improper Requests*


Jurisdiction:

In making a submission to request disclosure of a Customer’s contact 
information, *the Requester *and rights holder agree *[delete the "s"] * 
to submit, without prejudice to other potentially applicable 
jurisdictions, to the jurisdiction of the courts (1) where it is 
incorporated (or of its home address, if an individual), AND (2) where 
the Provider specifies on its request form, solely for disputes arising 
from alleged improper disclosures caused by knowingly false statements 
made by the Requester, or from Requester’s and/or rights holder’s 
knowing misuse of information disclosed to it in response to its request.


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Requester jurisdiction
Date: 	Fri, 27 Nov 2015 14:51:37 +0000 (GMT)
From: 	Chris Pelling <chris at netearth.net>
To: 	gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org>



Good afternoon all,

I mentioned in last weeks chat section on the PPSAI call about binding 
the requester jurisdiction and the requester to the same as the IP 
owner, to that end, I put forward the following changes to the final report.

Let me give an example :

Requester sends in a request they have no right too, or operated past 
their authority with a Rights Holder.

 1. Someone you have already worked with before, but they no longer have
    the authority.
 2. A lawyer (or IP person) has sent in a request, where on the face of
    it looks ok, and after doing a little googling to make certain
    confirmations that they were linked, well unbeknown to google, the
    IP rights holders sacked/terminated the requester’s services.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------:


1) Annex 1 To Disclosure Framework: Resolving Disputes Arising From 
Disclosures Made As A Result Of Allegedly Improper Requests

Notes:
***

Jurisdiction:

In making a submission to request disclosure of a Customer’s contact 
information, the /Requester /and rights holder agrees/ [change to 
agree]/ to submit, without prejudice to other potentially applicable 
jurisdictions, to the jurisdiction of the courts (1) where it is 
incorporated (or of its home address, if an individual), AND (2) where 
the Provider specifies on its request form, solely for disputes arising 
from alleged improper disclosures caused by knowingly false statements 
made by the Requester, or from Requester’s and/or rights holder’s 
knowing misuse of information disclosed to it in response to its request.

----------

2) Equivalent edits to all three Request Templates, e.g.,
II, A, 6:

 1. c) Agrees that the /Requester and /trademark holder will submit,
    without prejudice to other potentially applicable jurisdictions, to
    the jurisdiction of the courts (1) where it is incorporated (or of
    its home address, if an individual), AND (2) where the Provider
    specifies on its request form, solely for disputes arising from
    alleged improper disclosures caused by knowingly false statements
    made by the Requester, or from Requester’s and/or trademark
    holder’s knowing misuse of information disclosed to it in response
    to its request.

Can we please discuss the above as the first agenda item of the call 
once the usual prerequisites are done (role call, SOI etc) if there are 
any objections, otherwise, no need too and lets get the above into the 
final report.

Thanks and regards,


Chris



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/attachments/20151207/664c9bec/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg