November 2012 - Bc-gnso - lists.icann.org

FOR REVIEW: draft BC comment on ICANN's proposed rules for TM Matching
by Steve DelBianco 30 May '13

30 May '13

As discussed during yesterday's BC meeting in Toronto, Elisa Cooper has proposed a comment regarding ICANN's proposed plan for matching rules for names entered in the Trademark Clearinghouse. ICANN's Public Comment page for the proposed matching rules is here<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/tmch-docs-24sep12-en.htm>. The Matching Rules document we are commenting on is here<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/about/trademark-clearinghouse/matching-rules-2…>. Below is the BC comment proposed by Elisa Cooper: Subject: Trademark Clearinghouse Matching Rules for “@” and “&” Upon review of the possible methods for translating “@” and “&” as described in the “Explanatory Memorandum: Implementing the Matching Rules”, the Business Constituency requests that the languages for translations of “@” and “&” be chosen on a per-record basis by the trademark owner. The memorandum suggests that the language of translations should be based upon the official language(s) of the trademark registry. Restricting translations to the official language of the trademark registry is problematic, particularly for global brands or for trademarks registered in countries where there is no official language. Furthermore, requiring that translations of “@” and “&” match the official language of the trademark registry would likely result in additional costs to brand owners for additional submissions of the same mark to the Trademark Clearinghouse. Initial comments closed 16-Oct. At least one comment (link<http://forum.icann.org/lists/tmch-docs-sep12/msg00007.html>) refers to the language restriction, so the BC could file a reply comment by the Reply closing date of 7-Nov. That gives us enough time to allow our regular 14-day review and approval period. So, please reply all with your questions or suggestions regarding this draft, before 30-Oct-2012. Steve DelBianco Vice chair for policy coordination Business Constituency

22 59

Policy calendar for 2-Oct-2012 BC member call
by Steve DelBianco 13 Jan '13

13 Jan '13

Here is the latest BC policy calendar, for use during our 2-Oct-2012 member call. Channel 1. BC participation in ICANN Public Comment process: ICANN Public Comment page is <http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment> <http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment> here<https://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment><http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment> <https://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment> 1. DSSA Working Group Phase 1 report (reply comments close 21-Oct) 2. SSAC report on dot-less domains (reply comments close 5-Nov) 3. TM Clearinghouse rules for matching names / verifying proof of use (initial comments close 15-Oct) 4.. Draft policy recommendations for selection of IDN ccTLDs (initial comments close 18-Oct) 5. Protection of Olympics / Red Cross names — drafting team recommendations (initial comments close 19-Oct) 6. Community input and advice process (initial comments close 25-Oct) 7. Community input on draft 2013-2016 Strategic Plan (initial comments close 13-Nov) Note: BC members are encouraged to submit individual / company comments. The BC selects topics on which to submit official positions based on member interest. --- Channel 2. Support for discussion and votes of our representatives on GNSO Council John Berard and Zahid Jamil, BC Councilors Council work sessions in Toronto on 13-Oct (agenda<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Working+Sessio…>) and 14-Oct (agenda<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Working+Sessio…>). Council meeting on 17-Oct-2012, 15:00 Eastern. Agenda not yet published; two motions<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+17+October+…> are noticed: 1. BC motion to request an Issue Report on the current state of uniformity in the mechanisms to initiate, track, and analyze policy-violation reports 2. BC motion to Initiate PDP on Uniformity of Contracts to Address Registration Abuse GNSO Project Status available <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-projects-list.pdf> <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-projects-list.pdf> here<http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-projects-list.pdf> <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-projects-list.pdf> --- Channel 3. Supporting discussion/voting on matters before the Commercial Stakeholders Group (CSG) Elisa Cooper, CSG Liaison, and Marilyn Cade (alternate) Upcoming elections for GNSO Council Chair and Vice-Chair --- Channel 4. BC statements and responses during public meetings (outreach events, public forum, etc.) Non-Commercial Users Group (NCUC) is hosting a day-long ICANN policy conference on 12-Oct at Fairmont Royal York Hotel (agenda<http://www.amiando.com/NCUC-ICANN45.html?page=838202>). Phil Corwin is on a panel. Thick Whois PDP drafting team (Susan Kawaguchi, Elisa Cooper) Final report from the WG on definitions and metrics for Consumer Trust, Consumer Choice, and Competition in the new gTLD program. (Link<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/cctc/cctc-final-advice-letter-17aug12-en.pdf>) Remaining implementation work for gTLD expansion plan, incl BC requests for specific improvements (here<http://forum.icann.org/lists/newgtlds-defensive-applications/msg00022.html>). These previously-approved recommendations were discussed at US Govt meeting on 5-Sep. Implementing Affirmation review recommendations for Whois (Susan Kawaguchi, Lynn Goodendorf, Bill Smith) Implementing Affirmation review recommendations for SSR (Security, Stability, & Resilience) (Jeff Brueggeman)

1 3

BC Members call: Friday, Nov. 30, 2012 at 11 am EST (4 pm UTC)
by Benedetta Rossi 30 Nov '12

30 Nov '12

Dear BC Members, Please save the date for the upcoming BC members call taking place on *Friday, Nov. 30, 2012 at 11 am EST (4 pm UTC / 3 pm CET) for 90 minutes. * The agenda for the call is attached, as well as relevant materials for the call. Dial in details and calendar invitation will follow as soon as possible. Please let me know if you need a dial out. Thank you, Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat(a)icann.org

2 2

.Com prices frozen at $7.85 absent Extraordinary Circumstances
by Phil Corwin 30 Nov '12

30 Nov '12

https://investor.verisign.com/releaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=724216 http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2012/department-commerce-approves-ver… Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

1 0

FW: Breaking: Verisign To Hold Conference Call & Live Webcast Friday Morning At 8:30 AM On Status of .Com Contract
by Phil Corwin 29 Nov '12

29 Nov '12

FYI http://www.thedomains.com/2012/11/29/breaking-verisign-to-hold-conference-l… Breaking: Verisign To Hold Conference Call & Live Webcast Friday Morning At 8:30 AM On Status of .Com Contract 2012 November 29 by Michael Berkens Verisign ( NASDAQ : VRSN )just announced they will be holding a conference call and Live Webcast tomorrow morning, Friday November 30, 2012 at 8:30 AM EST: "to provide a status update on the .com Registry Agreement renewal". "The call will be accessible by direct dial at (888) 676-VRSN (U.S.) or (913) 312-0400 (international)." A listen-only live webcast of the conference call will also be available at http://investor.verisign.com<http://ctt.marketwire.com/?release=960074&id=2335801&type=1&url=http%3a%2f%…>. November 30th is the date previously set by Verisign as the deadline for a determination on the .Com contract without requiring an extension from the DOC. Shares of Verisign traded down almost 2% today to close at $39.31 and where trading down another 1% after hours but shares appear to have stopped trading. We of course will be watching the webcast to see if they got the .com contract renewed and if so at what rate and with what guaranteed increase, if any. As we reported<http://www.thedomains.com/2012/11/26/ica-tells-dept-of-commerce-to-make-ver…>, the Internet Commerce Association (ICA) wrote a lengthily letter to the to the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ), urging the DOC & the DOJ not to approve the renewal of the Verisign contract to operate the .com registry unless Verisign rolls back wholesale prices of .com domain names to the same price it charges for .net domain registrations and to limit price increases in the future to the increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2634/5426 - Release Date: 11/29/12

1 0

Report card on BC/IPC improvements in Rights Protection Mechanisms for new gTLDs
by Steve DelBianco 29 Nov '12

29 Nov '12

BC Members — in advance of our member call tomorrow, here's a "report card" on the eight RPM improvements we suggested in Toronto. (attached) The report card includes links to Fadi's blogs on "Strawman" proposals. Below the report card are my notes from Fadi's call on 26-Nov. This doc also includes the latest proposal from BC/IPC on how to implement "blocking" thru a Limited Preventative Registration mechanism (LPR). Look forward to the discussion tomorrow, when BC members who were engaged in the discussion can explain further: Marilyn Cade Elisa Cooper Bryce Coughlin Martin Sutton Susan Kawaguchi Fred Felman Sarah Deutsch -- Steve DelBianco Executive Director NetChoice http://www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org +1.202.420.7482

2 1

ALERTS from the Secretariat: Announcements & Open Public Comments
by Benedetta Rossi 29 Nov '12

29 Nov '12

Dear BC Members, Please find attached two useful documents: 1. Open public comments, updated as of today (Nov. 29, 2012) 2. List of recent ICANN announcements for the month of November Thank you, -- Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat(a)icann.org

1 0

Announcement of new VPs /Stakeholder
by Marilyn Cade 29 Nov '12

29 Nov '12

http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-28nov12-en.htm Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

1 0

FW: Fadi's blog /Follow up to TMCH working sessions in LA
by Marilyn Cade 27 Nov '12

27 Nov '12

Dear BC membersPlease see Fadi Chehade's blog conveying his approach for the 'way forward' for the strawman solution developed during the LA meeting. This included participation by Marilyn Cade, Fred Felman [substituting for Elisa Cooper who represented BC in Brussels]; Bryce Coughlin, Gerald Depardo; and Steve DelBianco. Martin Sutton was invited as a .brand representative and was also at the meeting in LA. The ExComm will meet today and discuss the status and possible approaches. We have a full members call on Friday and look forward to a fuller discussion at that time regarding practicalities and approaches to improvements to the Guidebook in the RPMs. After this work is concluded, Fadi will focus on RAA and URS, also key issues to the BC's members. Marilyn Cade, BC Chair --------------------------------------------------- http://blog.icann.org/2012/11/a-follow-up-to-our-trademark-clearinghouse-me… A Follow-Up to Our Trademark Clearinghouse Meetings by Fadi Chehadé on November 26, 2012 To wrap up the series of meetings ICANN convened with stakeholders to find common ground on Trademark Clearinghouse implementation, we conducted a follow-up briefing today for the group who worked on these issues during our meetings in Brussels and Los Angeles. We discussed two items: 1. An update on the Trademark Clearinghouse contract, and 2. A way forward on the strawman solution developed during the meeting in Los Angeles. Contracts ICANN has continued to negotiate the agreements for database services with IBM and for validation services with Deloitte to include additional terms that will provide ICANN with maximum operational flexibility and guaranteed stewardship of the trademark database. Here is an overview: ICANN retains all intellectual property rights in the Trademark Clearinghouse data. Deloitte’s validation services are to be non-exclusive. ICANN may add additional validators after a threshold of minimum stability is met. Trademark submission fees are capped at USD 150 per record. Discounts are available for bulk & multi-year submissions. IBM will charge Deloitte for database access via an application processing interface (API), and will charge registries and registrars for real-time access to the database during the sunrise and claims periods. ICANN may audit Deloitte’s performance (and revenues/costs) to confirm that the costs and fees for validation services are reasonable.We are moving to sign agreements as soon as possible and the agreements will be posted once signed. The "Strawman Solution" As promised, we reviewed each of the elements of the strawman solution to identify a way forward, paying special attention to determining whether each properly belonged in a policy or implementation process. We did not find that any element of the strawman was inconsistent with the policy advice from GNSO recommendation 3: Strings must not infringe the existing legal rights of others that are recognized or enforceable under generally accepted and internationally recognized principles of law. However, the analysis of the various elements yielded different recommended steps for consideration, as described below. Sunrise Notice Requirement. Our analysis is that the addition of the required 30-day notice period for Sunrise falls clearly into the realm of implementation. The policy advice did not recommend specific time periods, and this is a reasonable means to help address the communications concerns of rights holders, especially in light of the high volume of gTLD applications. Trademark Claims. The extension of Trademark Claims from 60 to 90 days can also be considered implementation, as it is a matter of continuing a service that is already required. The addition of a “Claims 2” process could also fall into the category of implementation given that it is an optional, fee-based service for rights holders, and is more lightweight than what registries and registrars will have implemented in the Trademark Claims 1 period. This service is envisioned to benefit both consumers and trademark holders, and is consistent with the objectives of the Trademark Claims service developed by the community. To the extent that there are additional costs incurred by registries and registrars, I envision that these fees can be offset when the process is implemented, as a portion of the fees to be collected by IBM for this voluntary service are to be shared with registries and registrars. Scope of Trademark Claims. The inclusion of strings previously found to be abusively registered in the Clearinghouse for purposes of Trademark Claims can be considered implementation, as it provides a path for associating a limited number of additional domain names with a trademark record. This is consistent with the policy advice that trademark rights should be protected, and, given that the inclusion of such names would be only on the basis of a decision rendered under the UDRP or a court proceeding, the process would merely take into account names for which the issues have already been balanced and considered. However, given the previous intensive discussions on the scope of protections associated with a Clearinghouse record, involving the IRT/STI, we believe this needs guidance from the GNSO Council.I will be sending a message to the GNSO Council asking it for guidance on the Scope of Trademark Claims. In addition, the strawman model will be posted this week for public comment. I am also including, along with the strawman model, a revised proposal from the BC/IPC for limited preventative registrations designed to address the need for second-level defensive registrations. Although this proposal is not currently part of the strawman model, I will be seeking guidance from the GNSO Council on this proposal as well. As a reminder, the strawman model was developed by participants selected by the respective stakeholder groups in the GNSO. I thank them for working with me to explore a balanced set of improvements to the TMCH and the rights protection mechanisms available for new gTLDs. I plan to convene this group one last time to discuss the outcome of planned contractual talks with IBM. I hope for this to happen later this week or next week. Sincerely, Fadi

1 0

Internet eco System/WCIT
by Marilyn Cade 27 Nov '12

27 Nov '12

Dear BC members While we are tremendously busy @ICANN, there is also a lot going on in the Internet Eco System front that has implications for ICANN. Many of you attended, or participated in the workshops at ICANN on ICANN and the Internet Eco System. I saw this recently, and thought it might be a useful backgrounder and status update. The ITU Treaty conference begins on 1/3 and concludes essentially for negotiations on 1/14, with formal publication on 1/15. It is too complex and not useful to dwell on the substance, however, as this topic has been of concern to many BC members, I am providing a link to a recent Forbes article. This is provided as a background document. I know that many of the BC companies, in their individual capacity, are actively attending or following the ITU WCIT. This posting is not to create a BC debate, but to inform other members that many of your colleagues in the BC are contributing to activities or initiatives that support ICANN's role and core mission. Technically, the WCIT should not be about ICANN but certain states are proposing changes in the ITU Treaty on Telecommunications Regulations that have implications for the Internet. We have a tremendous number of hot items at ICANN, but during December, the world will be watching Dubai and this conference. If you want to post something on the BC list on this topic, please use a subject line of Internet Eco System/WCIT, so that members not interested, can ignore and focus on other ICANN related topics. Marilyn Cade http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrydownes/2012/11/26/un-agencys-leaked-playbo…

1 0