[gnso-rpm-wg] A Brave New World Without Sunrises or the TMCH

Fri Apr 14 19:08:37 UTC 2017

I must admit I'm troubled at the suggestion that registries attempt to
enforce TM infringement standards.

E.g. Hanson.entertainment
How would the registry effectively parse the rights to registration of:

*	Hanson the band could use it for a music channel
*	Hanson Concrete could use it for how-to videos
*	Hanson Professional Services may register the domain for future use
to stream marketing videos

There are plenty of courtrooms where reasonable parties using the same mark
disagree on who's rights have primacy, I don't believe registries should be
asked to spit that baby.

Cyntia King

CEO & Founder

 <mailto:cking at modernip.com> cking at modernip.com

Modern IP, LLC

PO Box 609

Forsyth, MO  65653

+1 81-ModernIP / +1 816.633.7647

 <http://www.modernip.com/> www.modernip.com

 <http://www.twitter.com/modernip>    <http://www.facebook.com/modernipllc>

-----Original Message-----
From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org]
On Behalf Of J. Scott Evans via gnso-rpm-wg
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 1:11 PM
To: Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org>; gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] A Brave New World Without Sunrises or the TMCH

Jeremy:

First, even in a .fruit there is no guarantee that apple.fruit would be used
for supporting the benefits of the fruit. However, if someone would take
responsibility for the use of the second level TLD, that would be different.
I am sure a multi-national computer company would have no problem with folks
registering and using domains for generic or descriptive purposes or for
unrelated purposes. The problem that there is no easy way to thwart having
to file an expensive UDRP or more expensive lawsuit to police the misuse of
one's mark. If registries and registrars would enforce the provision of
their contracts where the registrant represents that its domain does not
infringe on the rights of others that would be one thing, but they don't. If
all new TLDs were sponsored or chartered wherein registration in the TLD
required upfront verification that the registrant was in the class of
persons for whom the TLD operates (e.g., like a .bank) or if domains were
not sold on a first come, first served basis (like Yellow Pages ads in the
old phone books), then we wouldn't have the issues we do.

There are many cost-effective and efficient solutions beyond the Sunrise,
but it also would greatly effect the artificial scarcity created by first
come, first served sales and the bottom-line of registries that would
actually need to take some responsibility to police their TLDs or at least
assist TM owners by taking down infringements.

J. Scott

J. Scott Evans

408.536.5336 (tel)

345 Park Avenue, Mail Stop W11-544

Director, Associate General Counsel

408.709.6162 (cell)

San Jose, CA, 95110, USA

Adobe. Make It an Experience.

 <mailto:jsevans at adobe.com> jsevans at adobe.com

 <http://www.adobe.com> www.adobe.com

On 4/14/17, 10:11 AM, "
<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org%20on%20behalf%20of%20Jeremy%20Malcolm>
gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org on behalf of Jeremy Malcolm" <
<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org%20on%20behalf%20of%20jmalcolm at eff.org>
gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org on behalf of jmalcolm at eff.org> wrote:

    On 13/4/17 8:47 pm, Greg Shatan wrote:

    > However, I don't think number 2 qualifies as gaming or abuse -- except

    > to the extent the trademark owner is being gamed or abused. Indeed,

    > one of the failed assumptions of the New gTLD Program seems to have

    > been that trademark owners would buy even more defensive registrations

    > than they did.

    So there's nothing wrong with a company that has a trademark for

    computers sunrise registering that trademark in a gTLD that relates to

    fruit on the strength of its computer trademark, locking out those who

    would actually use that domain name to sell fruit?  Sounds like abuse to
me.

    -- 

    Jeremy Malcolm

    Senior Global Policy Analyst

    Electronic Frontier Foundation

_______________________________________________

gnso-rpm-wg mailing list

 <mailto:gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org

 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170414/6e1afc16/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image009.png
Type: image/png
Size: 5425 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170414/6e1afc16/image009-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image010.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1221 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170414/6e1afc16/image010-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image011.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1253 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170414/6e1afc16/image011-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image012.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1303 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170414/6e1afc16/image012-0001.png>