April 2014 - council - lists.icann.org

Re: GNSO Council discussion Spec 13 and sunrise
by Volker Greimann April 15, 2014

April 15, 2014

Hi Philip, I fully agree it is a side issue unrelated to the question put to the council by the board, but it is one I have been curious about for a while, so thank you for indulging me. It may be the lawyer in me, butthe first thing I look for in a policy is how can this be abused? What holes need potential plugging? Note that the use or registration does need to be infringing on the third party trademark. By the use of the spec, you give a TLD operator applying for a qualifying string the ability to reserve and allocate an unlimited number of names, completely circumventing the Sunrise requirements, depriving Trademark Owners from their ability to have the first shot at these names. Theorethically, say you have a Mr. Joe Apple working at [BRANDNAME] who gets an employee domain for the catchy business email address joe(a)apple.[BRANDNAME]. Then the registry opts for an open model, does the sunrise for whatever it did not want, with Apple, Inc having no chance to get the domain name even though they would have had that chance in a "regular" sunrise. Excluding dotBrands from Sunrise and then also allowing them to open up and keep what they already registered looks like a perfect chance for someone to abuse the system, if they wanted. And then of course, one might ask the question why geographic TLD operators may only allocate up to 100 domain names to the local government in a pre-sunrise reservation program. Different measures? Volker Am 15.04.2014 17:37, schrieb BRG: > John, Volker, > since you prompted me to contribute to this debate I shall do so in a > personal capacity. > Martin is on leave this week. > (Note I do not have posting rights to Council) > I believe two issues are relevant. > Firstly, do be aware that you are discussing a separate question to > the one asked by the Board NGPC. > Secondly, the debate seems to me to be somewhat rarefied and seems set > in the context of traditional TLDs not .brands.What may be of interest > to consider is the likelihood of this activity, not the theoretical > possibility. Whereas brand.com or brand.bike may be of interest, > brand1.brand2 or brand2.brand1 raise issues of user confusion and > trade mark infringement. Incentives are different. Further, remedies > such as UDRP or even the registry-level PDDRP will be there to tackle > issues of infringement. > Philip

1 0

Re: [council] FW: GNSO Council discussion Spec 13
by Volker Greimann April 15, 2014

April 15, 2014

Hi John, assuming .HSBC opts for the spec, registers a bunch of domain names where there are TMCH records by other parties and later decides to go open, should they get to keep the domain names that they have registered circumventing the Sunrise requirement by using the Spec? Volker > Volker, > > You have confused me. > > Are you saying, for example, .HSBC (using Martin Sutton here!) > launching as a dotBRAND might distribute names that might otherwise go > in a Sunrise for trademark holders? > > And if .HSBC switches to general availability down the road, those > names will have been registered in circumvention of a Sunrise? > > But if HSBC allows its customers use of their name (e.g., BBC.HSBC or > Orange.HSBC) aren't they the proper registrants in any regime? > > I am having a hard time finding the problem to be solved. > > Help me understand. > > Berard > > On Apr 15, 2014 1:36 AM, Volker Greimann <vgreimann(a)key-Systems.net> > wrote: > > As obligatory Sunrise is the baby of the IPC and BC, I had > expected them to pick up on this issue as well. > > IIRC, if a dotBrand gives up exclusivity, it loses the dotBrand > status and the benefits of the spec. If would have to allow all > registrars to get accredited and execute a sunrise. However, at > that time, the damage may have already been done as the delayed > sunrise may have become a farce if the RO already registered to > its name all names that would be eligible for sunrise prior to > giving up exclusivity. It would be akin to something that ICANN > has been denying to other applicants, such as geoTLDs, essentially > allowing the registry an unlimited period of exclusivity to > reserve domain names to itself and a select circle of affiliates > and licensees before a sunrise would be applicable. > > I am not opposing the spec as it stands today, but I am pointing > out the loopholes that may lead to abuse. > > Volker > > > > Am 15.04.2014 09:01, schrieb Jonathan Robinson: >> >> All, >> >> Please see note below from Philip Sheppard. >> >> Jonathan >> >> *From:*BRG [mailto:philip@brandregistrygroup.org] >> *Sent:* 14 April 2014 17:03 >> *To:* jonathan.robinson(a)iprota.com >> *Subject:* GNSO Council discussion Spec 13 >> >> Jonathan, >> >> I noted that Klaus on the Council list asked this question: >> >> BTW: what happens if a brand gTLD decides down the road to give >> up exclusivity and become available for general use, at some >> point that might make perfect business sense. >> >> As I cannot post to Council, perhaps you would do so for me. >> >> Its a legitimate question and one also asked by ICANN legal staff. >> >> The answer is in other provisions of Spec 13. In the >> circumstances described by Klaus, all of Spec 13 would >> immediately no longer apply, and the default RA would apply instead. >> >> Philip >> >> Philip Sheppard >> >> Director General >> >> Brand Registry Group >> >> www.brandregistrygroup.org <http://www.brandregistrygroup.org/> >> >> Skype phsheppard >> >

2 1

Re: [council] FW: GNSO Council discussion Spec 13
by John Berard April 15, 2014

April 15, 2014

1 0

Spec. 13 notification email from ICANN
by Ching Chiao April 15, 2014

April 15, 2014

Dear colleagues, I assume some of you received the notification below. This is a clear evidence that the ICANN staff choose to proceed with .brand implementation WITHOUT GNSO's confirmation as requested by the Board. Ching -------- Dear Applicants and Registry Operators: On 26 March 2014, the New gTLD Program Committee (“NGPC”) of the ICANN Board approved the Registry Agreement Specification 13 for .Brand TLDs. View this resolution at: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-26mar14…. As per this resolution a process for requesting and evaluating applications for Specification 13 to the New gTLD Registry Agreement has been published at http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/base-agreement-spec-13-applicat… . We encourage you to read the resolution referenced above as well as Specification 13 to determine whether it is applicable to you. If you would like to submit an application for Specification 13, please follow the process described in Q1, Q2, or Q3 of the *Specification 13 to the Registry Agreement FAQs* posted at http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/base-agreement-spec-13-faqs-14a… . Please note that ICANN will post all applications for .Brand TLD designation for public comment for a period of 30 calendar days. The posting of these applications for public comment does not mean and should not be construed as a determination by ICANN that the TLD meets the criteria to be qualified as a .Brand TLD. Even if no public comments are received objecting to the designation of a TLD as a .Brand TLD, ICANN will review the re-application and may determine that the TLD does not qualify as a .Brand TLD. If you have previously submitted a Code of Conduct exemption request, please let us know via the Customer Service Center atnewgtld(a)icann.org or https://myicann.secure.force.com/ whether you intend to also submitting an application for .Brand TLD designation. As much as possible, ICANN will try to process the two requests together. If you have any questions regarding Specification 13 or this email notification, please contact the Customer Service Center atnewgtld(a)icann.org . --------

2 1

FW: GNSO Council discussion Spec 13
by Jonathan Robinson April 15, 2014

April 15, 2014

All, Please see note below from Philip Sheppard. Jonathan From: BRG [mailto:philip@brandregistrygroup.org] Sent: 14 April 2014 17:03 To: jonathan.robinson(a)iprota.com Subject: GNSO Council discussion Spec 13 Jonathan, I noted that Klaus on the Council list asked this question: BTW: what happens if a brand gTLD decides down the road to give up exclusivity and become available for general use, at some point that might make perfect business sense. As I cannot post to Council, perhaps you would do so for me. Its a legitimate question and one also asked by ICANN legal staff. The answer is in other provisions of Spec 13. In the circumstances described by Klaus, all of Spec 13 would immediately no longer apply, and the default RA would apply instead. Philip Philip Sheppard Director General Brand Registry Group www.brandregistrygroup.org <http://www.brandregistrygroup.org/> Skype phsheppard

3 2

Draft minutes GNSO Council meeting 27 February 2014 for review
by Glen de Saint Géry April 15, 2014

April 15, 2014

Dear Councillors, Attached please find the draft minutes of the GNSO Council meeting 27 February 2014 for your review. If there are no comments, these minutes will be published on the website as approved, according to the GNSO Rules of Procedure http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-13jun13-en.pdf <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-13jun13-en.pdf%20> > section 3.5 "If no objections are received within 10 days, the minutes will be deemed to have been approved for posting" on 25 April 2014. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Draft minutes GNSO Council meeting 26 March 2014 for review
by Glen de Saint Géry April 15, 2014

April 15, 2014

Dear Councillors, Attached please find the draft minutes of the GNSO Council meeting 26 March 2014 for your review. If there are no comments, these minutes will be published on the website as approved, according to the GNSO Rules of Procedure http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-13jun13-en.pdf <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-13jun13-en.pdf%20> > section 3.5 "If no objections are received within 10 days, the minutes will be deemed to have been approved for posting" on 25 April 2014. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

TR: GNSO / Specification 13 / Rec.19 CONTEXT
by Glen de Saint Géry April 14, 2014

April 14, 2014

FYI De : BRG [mailto:philip@brandregistrygroup.org] Envoyé : lundi 14 avril 2014 12:10 À : Glen de Saint Géry Cc : jonathan.robinson(a)iprota.com Objet : GNSO / Specification 13 / Rec.19 CONTEXT Glen, Jonathan, as you know the Board NGPC gave the GNSO Council 45 days to consider one aspect of Specification 13 - the exclusive registrars issue. I read the transcript of the GNSO first discussion on this issue last Thursday, 10 April. I hope our earlier FAQ was helpful in explaining the issue before Council. In the discussion it was clear that many Council members were not party to the 2005 - 2007 discussions on TLDs. You will recall I was a GNSO Council member at this time. I have prepared a 2-page backgrounder on the specific issue, using both the final report but also earlier reports in order to help provide today's GNSO Council with context. The background is enlightening. Without it the key element of Recommendation 19 may not be understood. Please distribute to the Council. I would be happy to answer any feedback. Philip Philip Sheppard Director General Brand Registry Group www.brandregistrygroup.org<http://www.brandregistrygroup.org/> Skype phsheppard

1 0

IRTP-D Chair Update
by Volker Greimann April 14, 2014

April 14, 2014

Dear Councillors, please note that due to the resignation of Mikey O'Connor, the IRTP-D WG has decided to continue with a single chair for the time being, pending confirmation of this change by the Council. -- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.

2 1

MP3 recording & chat transcript GNSO Council 10 April 2014
by Glen de Saint Géry April 10, 2014

April 10, 2014

[To:liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org; council[at]gnso.icann.org] Please find the MP3 recording of the GNSO Council teleconference held on Thursday, 10 April 2014 at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-council-20140410-en.mp3 as well as the Adobe chat transcript at : http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-chat-council-10apr14-en.pdf all on page http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#apr Thank you. Happy listening and reading! Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0