[Tmch-iag] Materials for 16 Dec 11 IAG calls

Wed Dec 14 04:01:20 UTC 2011

All,

With apologies for the delay, here are my comments.

General:  Please stop using "collides" and "collision" when referring to the match.  Doing so introduces new terminology (the last thing we need in ICANNland) that is unnecessary.  It's a match, not a collision.

P3:  I recommend against Approach 1 for the reasons noted by Brian and Stacey.  Because of my concerns about the security of the data in the Clearinghouse and to minimize the potential for abuse, I have a slight preference for Approach 3 over Approach 2.

P5:  I support Approach 2 for the reasons set out by Brian and Stacey.

T1:  I support Approach 1 because of concerns about the potential abuse and misuse of TMCH data.  Even if ICANN is willing to amend the new gTLD Registry Agreement and both ICANN and RrSG are willing to amend the RAA to explicitly prohibit abuse and misuse of TMCH data and to impose penalties for such misuse and abuse, there serious concerns in the trademark community about ICANN Compliance's capacity to handle the other compliance issues that will likely arise in connection with the addition of potentially hundreds of new registries - let alone this issue.  The security of the data in the TMCH and its vulnerability to abuse and misuse is a very significant concern to the trademark owners with whom I've raised the issue.    An implementation decision that does not fully address these concerns has the potential to impact drastically (and negatively) the willingness of trademark owners to deposit their data.  After trumpeting the TMCH so vigorously (and citing to brand owner participation in this group in Senate and House testimony), it would be ironic if ICANN itself undermined the utility of the TMCH and trademark owner willingness to use it.

I plan to be on the process call, but currently have a conflict that will prevent my attendance on the technical call.

Sincerely yours,
Kristina

Kristina Rosette
Covington & Burling LLP
1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC  20004
voice: 202.662.5173
fax: 202.778.5173
krosette at cov.com
www.cov.com/krosette

This message is from a law firm and may contain information that is confidential or legally privileged.  If you are not the intended recipient, please immediately advise the sender by reply e-mail that this message has been inadvertently transmitted to you and delete this e-mail from your system.  Thank you.

________________________________
From: tmch-iag-bounces at icann.org [mailto:tmch-iag-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Karen Lentz
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 2:44 PM
To: tmch-iag at icann.org
Subject: [Tmch-iag] Materials for 16 Dec 11 IAG calls

Dear Colleagues,

Thanks again for the useful submissions and participation on the last IAG call on 30 November.

For those who were not able to attend, materials from the call are posted
at https://community.icann.org/display/cctrdmrkclrnghsiag/Home, including
slides, documents, chat transcript and audio recording.

Note that any follow up submissions on the issues P1 and P2 are due by Monday, 12 December.  We'll provide a brief update to those 2 issues after review of all the materials.

Schedule

For the call schedule going forward, note that there are 2 tracks that will proceed in parallel:  the process track (focusing on business process development, as now underway) and the technical track (focusing on technical implementation issues).

Therefore, on 16 December, there will be 2 calls taking place:

1.       Process call (issues P3 and P5) at 13:00 UTC.

2.       Technical call (issues T1 and T3) at 16:00 UTC.

Both calls are scheduled for 90 minutes and will use the existing dial-in number and Adobe Connect room.

You may choose to attend both calls, if you wish, or focus only on one you are interested in.  The relevant documents for both are attached.

Process Track
Issue# P3 (Responsibility for Trademark Holder Registration Notice)
Issue# P5 (Responsibility to Perform Trademark Claims Checks)
We will discuss these topics, informed by your written comments, on the 16 Dec call.  Please submit your written comments to these issues by 13 Dec 2011 (23:59 UTC) to the mailing list.

As discussed previously, we are ultimately seeking your recommendations
for either (1) one of the proposed options in the document or (2) your
suggestions for alternatives that you believe to be more attractive and
that should be considered.

In your written comments, please make sure to indicate:  (a) the issue
number (P3 or P5), (b) the recommended option or alternative for the issue,
(c) rationale (consideration of advantages and how any disadvantages could
be minimized) and (d) any other comments.

Technical Track
Issue# T1 (Data Locations)
Issue# T3 (Communication Protocols)
We will discuss these topics, informed by your written comments, on the 16 Dec call.  Please submit your written comments to these issues by 13 Dec 2011 (23:59) UTC to the mailing list.

We are ultimately seeking your recommendations for either (1) one of the
proposed options in the document or (2) your suggestions for alternatives
that you believe to be more attractive and that should be considered.

In your written comments, please make sure to indicate:  (a) the issue
number (T1 or T3), (b) the recommended option or alternative for the issue,
(c) rationale (consideration of advantages and how any disadvantages could
be minimized) and (d) any other comments.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Karen Lentz
ICANN

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tmch-iag/attachments/20111213/eb3acdf9/attachment-0001.html 