[gnso-rpm-wg] FOR INFORMATION: Letter from trademark scholars and information on Deloitte Ancillary Services

Paul Keating paul at law.es
Tue Mar 28 19:37:30 UTC 2017 

I have full respect for the system and all comments must be reviewed and considered.

The issue was in what order they need to be considered.

I see no reason why we must use a taxi-stand approach.    Do you?

Sent from my iPad

> On 28 Mar 2017, at 19:50, Kiran Malancharuvil <Kiran.Malancharuvil at markmonitor.com> wrote:
> 
> I'm sorry that you don't seem to respect the multistakeholder decision making process, but PDP procedures demand that all public comments be evaluated equally.
> 
> Kiran Malancharuvil 
> Policy Counselor
> MarkMonitor
> 415-419-9138 (m) 
> 
> Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos. 
> 
>> On Mar 28, 2017, at 10:48 AM, Paul Keating <Paul at law.es> wrote:
>> 
>> O please.  If I wrote the letter you all should not care a whit.  If EFF
>> and other scholars (all listed) wrote the letter, I ask that we all stand
>> up and read it.
>> 
>> On 3/28/17, 6:39 PM, "Kiran Malancharuvil"
>> <Kiran.Malancharuvil at markmonitor.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> With respect Paul, even if I agreed with that characterization, no one is
>>> "heavier" than anyone else at ICANN.
>>> 
>>> Kiran Malancharuvil
>>> Policy Counselor
>>> MarkMonitor
>>> 415-419-9138 (m) 
>>> 
>>> Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos.
>>> 
>>>> On Mar 28, 2017, at 10:36 AM, Paul Keating <Paul at law.es> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Well it was written but some relatively heavies in the legal field.
>>>> 
>>>> On 3/28/17, 4:42 PM, "Kiran Malancharuvil via gnso-rpm-wg"
>>>> <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org on behalf of gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Many of the signatories aren't members of the working group. When
>>>>> input/comment is received by an ICANN working group by outside parties,
>>>>> the working group often invites those people to attend a meeting to
>>>>> facilitate the discussion so that there can be meaningful dialogue and
>>>>> a
>>>>> better common understanding of the issues raised.
>>>>> 
>>>>> There is a prescribed time in the icann policy development process for
>>>>> solicitation of comments, as well as review and consideration of public
>>>>> comment. My question (for staff, to be clear) is why we are considering
>>>>> this public comment out of turn. Why does it have elevated importance?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Kiran 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Kiran Malancharuvil
>>>>> Policy Counselor
>>>>> MarkMonitor
>>>>> 415-419-9138 (m)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Mar 28, 2017, at 8:33 AM, Rebecca Tushnet
>>>>>> <Rebecca.Tushnet at law.georgetown.edu> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> (1) Yes. (2) Invited by whom? (3) It's my understanding that all
>>>>>> comments should be considered; are you aware of any we're ignoring?
>>>>>> Rebecca Tushnet
>>>>>> Georgetown Law
>>>>>> 703 593 6759
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Kiran Malancharuvil via gnso-rpm-wg
>>>>>> <gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> Agree with Jeff.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Also, are these "trademark scholars" represented in the group? Are
>>>>>>> they invited in for discussion? Why is this letter any more important
>>>>>>> than any other public comment?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Kiran
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Kiran Malancharuvil
>>>>>>> Policy Counselor
>>>>>>> MarkMonitor
>>>>>>> 415-419-9138 (m)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Mar 28, 2017, at 7:54 AM, Jeff Neuman
>>>>>>> <jeff.neuman at comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks Mary.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Co-Chairs,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Can I assume that with respect to the EFF letter, the only items we
>>>>>>> would be discussing from that letter at this point are their comments
>>>>>>> with respect to design marks and the transparency of the TMCH
>>>>>>> database?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I am not saying the other comments are not important, but with
>>>>>>> respect
>>>>>>> to this Working Group at this time, we are not yet addressing those
>>>>>>> other issues.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I would strongly urge that we not engage yet in the other discussion
>>>>>>> around the other comments at this point (namely, trademark rights in
>>>>>>> general), as I think that could lead us down a large rabbit hole and
>>>>>>> considerably slow down out work.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> From: 
>>>>>>> gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org>
>>>>>>> [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong
>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 6:15 AM
>>>>>>> To: gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>
>>>>>>> Subject: [gnso-rpm-wg] FOR INFORMATION: Letter from trademark
>>>>>>> scholars
>>>>>>> and information on Deloitte Ancillary Services
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> During the ICANN58 Working Group sessions in Copenhagen, the
>>>>>>> following
>>>>>>> two matters came up for which staff is now following up with the
>>>>>>> requested document (for #1) and information (for #2).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Item #1: Letter of 10 March 2017 from some trademark scholars and
>>>>>>> practitioners to our Working Group co-chairs expressing concerns with
>>>>>>> certain aspects of the TMCH:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> https://www.eff.org/files/2017/03/10/tm_scholars_letter_to_icann_final
>>>>>>> .p
>>>>>>> df.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Item #2: Question regarding the Ancillary Services that Deloitte is
>>>>>>> permitted to provide under its Validation Agreement with ICANN,
>>>>>>> subject
>>>>>>> to ICANN's authorization.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Currently, two Ancillary Services have been approved by ICANN:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 1.       Extended Claims Services
>>>>>>> The extended claims services provide the Trademark Holder or
>>>>>>> Trademark
>>>>>>> Agent, as applicable, with an electronic notification when a domain
>>>>>>> name registered in an Eligible TLD matches one or more of such
>>>>>>> party's
>>>>>>> recorded labels with the TMCH.  The extended claims services does not
>>>>>>> include a domain name pre-registration notification (i.e. a
>>>>>>> notification to the potential registrant of a domain name that the
>>>>>>> domain name such registrant intends to register matches a label
>>>>>>> recorded with the Trademark Clearinghouse).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 2.       Audit Report
>>>>>>> Deloitte may offer an audit report service for Trademark Holders and
>>>>>>> Trademark Agents with active Trademark Records recorded in the
>>>>>>> Trademark Clearinghouse.  Such audit reports shall consist primarily
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> a listing of matches between their recorded labels within the
>>>>>>> Trademark
>>>>>>> Clearinghouse and domain names registered in an Eligible TLD.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> FYI, Deloitte's contract with ICANN is for an initial period expiring
>>>>>>> on the fifth anniversary of ICANN's entry into a Registry Agreement
>>>>>>> under the New gTLD Program, with consecutive one-year renewals
>>>>>>> thereafter. Although Deloitte currently serves as the sole TMCH
>>>>>>> validator, ICANN may appoint additional validators once ten Qualified
>>>>>>> Sunrise Periods have been completed under the New gTLD Program.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks and cheers
>>>>>>> Mary
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
>>>>>>> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>
>>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
>>>>>>> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
>>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
>>>>> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>

More information about the gnso-rpm-wg mailing list