Hi Olivier, I was wondering whether we could have a wiki dedicated to Trademark Clearing House Issues so that there is a dedicated site to collate and generate feedback. Kind Regards, Sala ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Date: Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 3:15 AM Subject: [At-Large] Fwd: Re: [GTLD-WG] Trademark Clearinghouse procedures To: At-Large Worldwide <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Rudi also posted a message to the ALAC GTLD WG and I replied with a bit of the history. Alan

Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 10:22:48 -0400 To: Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick@isoc.be>, gTLD WG <gtld-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> CC: Staff At Large <Staff@atlarge.icann.org> Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] Trademark Clearinghouse procedures

This has been discussed since the start of the TMCH concept.

The IRT said that the cost to TM holders should be "reasonable" but I believe it was silent on whether ICANN or Registries should contribute.

The STI report said the "cost should be born by users" but was silent on who the users were, but the implication is both TM holders and Registries. The rationale was that if the TMCH did not exist, the registry would have to build a comparable system itself (although the registry could then absorb part of the cost or put it all on TM holders). The report was explicit that ICANN should not fund the CH nor should the CH provide funds to ICANN. The Registry SG and NCSG issues a minority opinion that TM should fund the entire cost.

The final AG said "Costs should be completely borne by the parties utilizing the services. Trademark holders will pay to register the Clearinghouse, and registries will pay for Trademark Claims and Sunrise services. Registrars and others who avail themselves of Clearinghouse services will pay the Clearinghouse directly."

Alan

At 22/08/2012 09:18 AM, Rudi Vansnick wrote:

...

Dear all,

Yesterday, I've participated remotely to the TMCH 2-days meetings in Brussels. A very interesting meeting with many discussions illustrating the TMCH solution is not yet in a consensus level. However, the provider is selected and should start delivering solutions. From the meeting I understood nothing has yet being worked out and the community was asked for input / approval of processes to implement.

When reading through the Trademark Clearinghouse: Preliminary Cost Model (version 1 June 2012) (see attached PDF) I was surprised reading the following paragraph :

...

Services to Registries Initial implementation and fee discussions indicate that registries will pay for access to the Clearinghouse database. Further details are still being worked out; however, initial estimates based on currently available information indicate that a set-up fee of USD 7,000 - 10,000 will be due per TLD registry. The set-up fee would cover Sunrise and Trademark Claims processes as established by ICANN, as well as assistance in integration and testing. Additional fees will be due in other circumstances such as participation in other programs or ancillary services.

Does this mean the registries do have to pay for the services that are of benefit to the Trademark owners ? In the previous paragraph is mentioned :

...

Services to Rightsholders The primary services offered to rights holders are: (1) authentication as a trademark and (2) validation of proof-of-use. The first establishes that rights information meets the criteria for Clearinghouse inclusion and the second establishes that a Clearinghouse record meets the standard for Sunrise eligibility as described by ICANN, i.e., demonstration of use of the trademark. A bundled fee is expected where these services are performed together. Proof of use validation would also be available at an individual price if such is requested subsequent to the original submission of rights data for authentication. The bundled fee or price for these initial services (authentication and validation) is expected to be less than USD 150 per submission. Annual renewal fees for Clearinghouse records are expected at a percentage of the initial price. The low fee requires that submissions be inexpensive and straightforward to process. Complex circumstances and additional services will add to the cost. There may be additional charges if further scrutiny is required (such as a re-submission due to errors in the original submission or an appeal to the initial Clearinghouse determination). Also, non-electronic submissions might be available at a higher rate in order to cover handling costs.

As such I understand the Trademark owners just pay a very small fee to get their name been protected while the majority of the cost is covered by the registry, which in the end means the registrant will pay for it !!

At the other side, the registry (applicant) already invested 185.000$ at least and should now add to this amount at least 7000 $. Was this foreseen in the Guidebook ? As far as I could see yet, it wasn't. Does this mean that applicants could eventually be able to withdraw with full reimbursement of their investment ?

Just some thoughts and reflections after yesterday's meetings ...

What's ALAC's position in this ?

Rudi Vansnick

_______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg

Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs

_______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg

Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs

_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851