[GNSO-RPM-WG] Simplified language to bring together individual TMCH #4 & #5 proposals

[Corwin, Philip]

Thanks Paul



Philip S. Corwin

Policy Counsel

VeriSign, Inc.

12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190

703-948-4648/Direct

571-342-7489/Cell



"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey



From: Paul Tattersfield <gpmgroup at gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2020 12:31 PM
To: Corwin, Philip <pcorwin at verisign.com>
Cc: gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Re: [GNSO-RPM-WG] Simplified language to bring together individual TMCH #4 & #5 proposals



Hi Phil,

Please see below the proposed wording to bring Rebecca's and Claudio's proposals #4 & #5 together to reach consensus. We may also need some policy principles on who has ultimate authority in the extremely unlikely event the TMCH refuses to accept a mark that is within policy. But overarching questions on ultimate authority are likely best served elsewhere.

Best regards, Paul


3.2 The standards for inclusion in the Clearinghouse are:

3.2.1      Nationally or regionally registered word marks from all jurisdictions.
3.2.2      Any word mark that has been validated through a court of law or other judicial proceeding.

3.2.3      Any Word marks protected by a statute or treaty in effect at the time the mark is submitted to the Clearinghouse for inclusion.

3.2.4      Other marks and indications that constitute intellectual property.

3.2.5      Protections afforded to trademark registrations do not extend to applications for registrations, marks within any opposition period or registered marks that were the subject of successful invalidation, cancellation or rectification proceedings.

3.2.6      Protections afforded to word marks protected by statute or treaty do not extend to geographical indications and other quality schemes unless they also satisfy 3.2.1 or 3.2.2

3.2.7     Word marks here include service marks, collective marks, certification marks and word marks protected by statute or treaty.

3.2.8     Sunrise and Claims services available through the TMCH are limited only to word marks under sections 3.2.1, 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 (as further limited by sections 3.2.5 and 3.2.6).

3.2.9     Nothing in section 3.2 shall exclude the TMCH provider and registry operators from offering additional voluntary services to mark holders (e.g. via ancillary databases). Any marks admitted pursuant to section 3.2.4 which do not also qualify for submission under sections 3.2.1, 3.2.2 or 3.2.3 shall be held only in an ancillary database.



On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 4:16 PM Corwin, Philip <pcorwin at verisign.com<mailto:pcorwin at verisign.com>> wrote:

   Can you please share the full text of the proposal from you, Rebecca and Claudio that we will be discussing today?



   Thanks



   Philip S. Corwin

   Policy Counsel

   VeriSign, Inc.

   12061 Bluemont Way
   Reston, VA 20190

   703-948-4648/Direct

   571-342-7489/Cell



   "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey



   From: GNSO-RPM-WG <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org>> On Behalf Of Paul Tattersfield
   Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2020 7:22 AM
   To: gnso-rpm-wg <gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>>
   Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [GNSO-RPM-WG] Simplified language to bring together individual TMCH #4 & #5 proposals



   Hi All, Please see below improved wording for 3.2.7 bringing together GAC advice and Mary’s / Staff observations and new clauses 3.2.8 & 3.2.9 clarifying working group member’s policy intentions. Best regards, Paul


   3.2.7     Word marks here include service marks, collective marks, certification marks and word marks protected by statute or treaty.

   3.2.8     Sunrise and Claims services available through the TMCH are limited only to word marks under sections 3.2.1, 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 (as further limited by sections 3.2.5 and 3.2.6).

   3.2.9     Nothing in section 3.2 shall exclude the TMCH provider and registry operators from offering additional voluntary services to mark holders (e.g. via ancillary databases). Marks under section 3.2.4 must be held in an ancillary database.



   Implementation of Consensus Policy for the Protection of Red Cross & Red Crescent Identifiers
   https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2020-02-18-en<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1ndqdFZScX6xY3wAJjo75d47lU0adf8bKhc04Yg5ShCoAe5hC9KkRYeautAJoDZiO335mYsDnPXdw4eFntKvMrbY3d4mkOQsD6VPSLwq187UucURN2kuMNgRU_UXKv9u0IN008vapXiiDdkGJTtpY_V4Gln8vzh55jDcj734cnIuAMAl1pYstjuRXaQ7LNNxzXX2XahSI2utQ2-nP7lwg9SCOZQrc2oWWat6MJpF4mzcZGUHyDMJJLYYWHMQKGlFJXmLruHHjXdQ0tQYUIwZhXQ/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fnews%2Fannouncement-2020-02-18-en>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20200730/90329dc7/attachment-0001.html>