Dear all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for the DT-IPR Meeting on 16 November 2015 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/QLpYAw A copy of the notes and action items may be found below. Kind regards, Brenda Action Items * Action item: ask ICANN for information on current practice and management of the IP to date (note, ICANN has not had to exercise external quality control to date as there is no licensee but only internal quality control) Notes . See document circulated by Greg prior to this meeting (see also <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iUREZlPBiU-oSYxQXiahEbTcH4P3Ov_EReWzmXNH...> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iUREZlPBiU-oSYxQXiahEbTcH4P3Ov_EReWzmXNH...) . Remit is to come up with requirements and principles that CWG-Stewardship would use to determine what would be an appropriate owner of the IANA trademarks and domain names . Use those requirements and principles to evaluate potential owner. Only proposed candidate at this point in time is the IETF Trust. . Question 1: What should be the requirements of the Trust to ensure continued operations, stability and security of the IANA functions in the event of separation? Owner will not be operator so there needs to be a license, but also consider minimum requirements linked to an owner. Question 1, bullet #3 is key, but directions should also be followed prior to any possible separation. User of trademark is only one single user at this moment. IANA operator will be exclusively licensee following transition, but owner of trademark (trust) would also have certain obligations per trademark law. There is a need to not impede the continued operations (additional requirement). . Question 5: What does the DT propose to be the defining qualities of a neutral/independent trust that will serve in this role? Review of responses provided during last meeting which is a working draft which is open for refinement. Key requirement is #3 (responsive and responsible to three communities). Also considers cost issue (needs to have necessary funding to carry out these responsibilities & needs access to employee with experience (license manager) and outside trademark counsel). . What does 'neutral' mean: a) not captured by or under the sole control of the IANA Function Operator, b) towards the views of the three communities, c) should not be an IFO (what is believed to be the intent of the other operational communities), d) not dominated by any of the operational communities - needs equilibrium (could be established contractually). Broader definition of neutrality is already captured as part of other requirements (e.g. follow instructions of relevant communities), consider sticking to narrow definition here (not IFO). . Quality control has to meet the requirements / needs of all three communities. If any has any concern about how IANA is performing in relation to trademark, a mechanism needs to be in place to address such concerns. Could quality control also be outsourced? Certain amount of operational control could be sub-contracted for example to operational communities, but ultimate control/responsibility is with the trademark owner. Brand owner is required to exercise active quality control to meet minimum requirements. . IETF Trust will not change its governance structure - is not a practical option and not an expected outcome. If requirements cannot be met by IETF Trust it may be more efficient and effective to create a new trust or consider whether there are contractual arrangements that could be put in place to meet the requirements without changing the governance structure. If you would start from scratch you might actually have come up with a joint trust - but not feasible within current timeframe. . Under which circumstances, if any, would the trademark be taken away from the new owner (the trust)? Separate question to be considered at some point. . Consider eventually moving from this document to clearer principles and requirements. . Need to determine what quality control needs to be exercised to meet minimum obligations. . Next CWG-Stewardship meeting is scheduled for Thursday. Greg will review and update document to make it more user-friendly to look at principles and requirements to facilitate further input on the list. . Next DT-IPR call scheduled for next week, Tuesday 24 November at 21.00 UTC. Action item: ask ICANN for information on current practice and management of the IP to date (note, ICANN has not had to exercise external quality control to date as there is no licensee but only internal quality control)