Lesley,

Thank you for this clarification.

From my personal perspective there is no need to start this discussion, because I don’t see any possibility to implement these recommendations in the near future. Basically for two reasons:

1. Most of the IRT report was drafted thinking in Sunrise periods, or “new” TLD’s.
2. The IRT composition was mainly to attend the Intellectual Property concerns about the new gTLDs program, thus lacks of broader discussion (example, the discussion on Globally Protected  Marks List, didn’t take into account the first WIPO Report on Well Known Trademarks, held ten years ago with a broader committee, broader participation community and longer period for discussions)

But of curse, I’m open to discuss it.

Best Regards,

Oscar

---

From: Lesley Cowley [mailto:lesley@nominet.org.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 10:47 AM
To: Oscar A. Robles-Garay
Cc: ccNSO Council; ccNSO Members; owner-ccnso-council@icann.org
Subject: RE: [ccnso-council] Seoul Meeting Programme

Oscar (and others),

owner-ccnso-council@icann.org wrote on 15/07/2009 16:39:14:  
> When you talk about dispute processes you are referring to solutions
> to solve traditional disputes (domain vs. trademark) or something else?

Apologies for my lack of clarity. I was specifically talking about the measures being proposed by the IRT report in respect of the new gTLDs - which include pre-registration measures as well as post-registration measures to protect trademark interests.

Regards,

Lesley

> From: owner-ccnso-council@icann.org [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org]
> On Behalf Of Lesley Cowley
> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 5:27 AM
> To: ccNSO Council
> Cc: ccNSO Members
> Subject: [ccnso-council] Seoul Meeting Programme
>  
> I know that it is early to be thinking about items for our next
> meeting, but.....
>
> It has been a while since we have discussed dispute processes in the
> ccNSO and when we last did so, we focussed on sharing ccTLD best
> practices. However, I suggest that it might be of interest to ccTLD
> managers to hear about and discuss the latest ideas on dispute
> processes in the gTLD space, particularly those currently being
> proposed for new gTLDs. In my view, I think that it is only a matter
> of time before it is suggested that ccTLD registries should adopt
> similar measures.
>
> Regards,
>
> Lesley