Dear All, Please find the attendance and MP3 recording for the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection PDP WG Meeting held on Thursday, 13 October 2016 at 17:00 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-crp-pdp-13oct16-en.mp3 <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-crp-pdp-13oct16-en.mp3> On page: https://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#oct<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar-23oct&d=DQMF-g&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=8_WhWIPqsLT6TmF1Zmyci866vcPSFO4VShFqESGe_5iHWGlBLwwwehFBfjrsjWv9&m=WQbWGIJMveDL4JQUV9LwXzg3WnjS3gvI-BF12n4VOQM&s=N8qDCFyjQ9zGaUjf14ZffWw6VR8-NfCkDx5Q6gbMgsg&e=> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar-23nov&d=DQMF-g&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=8_WhWIPqsLT6TmF1Zmyci866vcPSFO4VShFqESGe_5iHWGlBLwwwehFBfjrsjWv9&m=wBBn3Ar2_mvUeGcM8rpOAyluUFEJFG5lASQ-cAccI2k&s=3BfiwO43tzwlrIbIyBY4Q-14zsFQCX518fLLR8GWR7I&e=> Attendees: George Kirikos – Individual Jay Chapman – Individual Lori Schulman - IPC Mason Cole – RySG Nischa Vreeling (for Jim Bikoff) - IPC Osvaldo Novoa - ISPCP Paul Tattersfield – Individual Petter Rindforth - IPC Phil Corwin - BC Apologies: Paul Keating - NCUC Reg Levy - RySG ICANN staff: Mary Wong Steve Chan Berry Cobb Michelle DeSmyter ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__mm.icann.org_pipermail_gnso-2Dppsai-2Dpdp-2Dwg_&d=DQMF-g&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=8_WhWIPqsLT6TmF1Zmyci866vcPSFO4VShFqESGe_5iHWGlBLwwwehFBfjrsjWv9&m=wBBn3Ar2_mvUeGcM8rpOAyluUFEJFG5lASQ-cAccI2k&s=0DPVbyS_PjKHjDK_BuEqUeaDPy30OftE7eI0j4dIwJc&e=> Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/-hi4Aw Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle DeSmyter ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Thursday, 13 October 2016 Michelle DeSmyter:Dear All, Welcome to the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms WG on Thursday, 13 October 2016 at 17:00 UTC. George Kirikos:Hi folks. Michelle DeSmyter:Hello, hello! Petter Rindforth:Hi George & Michelle George Kirikos:Hi Michelle & Petter. Paul Tattersfield:Hi George Kirikos:Welcome Paul. Paul Tattersfield:Quiet day today Mary Wong:The proposal starts on Page 3 of the PDF Philip Corwin:When Petter concludes I'd like to speak first to provide background on GNSO Council discussions of this Proposal Lori Schulman:Hi George Kirikos:Welcome Lori. Lori Schulman:I don't have audio yet. Lori Schulman:waiting... Paul Tattersfield:Peter is just reading the letter from the small group proposal Lori Schulman:I have audio now. Osvaldo Novoa:Hello all, sorry I'm late George Kirikos:Hi Osvaldo. George Kirikos:Proposal #1 is not within our PDP's scope (it's not curative). Should our charter be amended to comment on it? George Kirikos:(#1 is preventative) Mary Wong:@George, I don't believe so - that is the subject of a completed PDP and the GNSO has a different process to deal with amendments to that. Lori Schulman:I think that 1 is related because it goes to the basis of the CRP so we could comment on it. Our comments on 6ter do cover it unless I am missing something. 6ter is not trademark law but trademark registries are used to implement Lori Schulman:Agree with Petter on this point. Mary Wong:@Petter, I can answer that Paul Tattersfield: It’s useful to have point 1 in the proposals as it gives the proposal completeness Mary Wong:@George, the IGO names will be protected according to the recommendations of the original PDP WG. George Kirikos:@Mary: It was my expectation that the IGO names themselves on the reserved list would disappear (i.e. the reserved list would be sunsetted at some point). Mary Wong:@George, no - the original PDP confirmed that IGO full names will be reserved at the second level George Kirikos:@Mary: Wouldn't that encourage gaming, then, since IGOs would be incentivized to change their names to their acronyms??!!?? George Kirikos:(i.e. change "United Nations" to "UN" and thus reserve "UN" in all TLDs) Mary Wong:The names are what is on the GAC list, unless amended by the GAC George Kirikos:Agree, Phil. George Kirikos:#2 and #3 are fully handled by the UDRP & URS respectively, via the assignee, agent, licensee routes, etc. Paul Tattersfield:Exactly George, ICANN should concentrate on providing mechanisms for all groups not selected or promoted groups/interests. Lori Schulman:Just want to repeat that Agency is not workable solution. License maybe. Only assignment works and that is not a business model that IGO's follow. George Kirikos:@Mary: But don't those recommendations (for full names) only apply to new gTLDs? Whereas our work also includes legacy gTLDs? George Kirikos:(i.e. I don't think that reserved list applies to .com) Paul Tattersfield:yes George Berry Cobb:@George, the 2nd level reservations for full names applies to ALL gTLDs (new & Legcy) https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group... Mary Wong:@George, that is correct - and is one of the follow on sub questions I alluded to. George Kirikos:https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resources... <<-- confirms it is for new gTLDs Mary Wong:i.e. meshing recormmendations for: (1) all IGOs versus IGOs on the GAC list, and (2) New gTLD mechanisms versus all gTLDs Berry Cobb:@ George, that is because the recommendations from that first PDP have not been implemented yet. Once done, that Spec 5 list will change, and also will become policy advisories for legacy TLDs. Mary Wong:But the Full Names policy will apply to all gTLDs Mary Wong:(as Berry has just noted) George Kirikos:Amusingly, some of the IGO acronyms collide, e.g. World Trade Organization, World Tourism Organization = WTO :-) Paul Tattersfield:I think the proposal is helpful because it sets out clearly what the IGOs & GAC want and most of that can easily be dealt with within the current UDRP & URS mechanisms Jay Chapman:+1 Paul Paul Tattersfield:I think we should deal with the proposal first, line by line and see how it can be implemented Paul Tattersfield:URS? Paul Tattersfield:Isn’t that what URS is for? George Kirikos:Right, Paul. Mary Wong:@Petter, yes, that's another example - hence our suggestion that we take a closer look at the scope of the proposals. George Kirikos:I think Phil's hand is new. Mary Wong:And mine was vestigial :) Mary Wong:@Paul T, just saw your suggestion. We can convert the document for that purpose, to Word or Google doc. George Kirikos:Those are just weak rephrasings of the UDRP/URS, as Phil says. Jay Chapman:agree Phil Mary Wong:@Phil, that will be an EXCELLENT point to make, esp in Hyderabad when you and Petter present the initial recommendations to the community George Kirikos:It'll be done when it's done. George Kirikos:Now that the IGO small group has made a proposal, any chance they'd be amenable to participating in a call with us? Or do we interpret their report as a desire to not work with us? (i.e. we just shoot competing written reports back/forth)? Philip Corwin:We can certainly describe our likely recommendations in Hyderabad, even if final text is not ready because of the need to respond in detail to the IGO Proposal. George Kirikos:(they do seem to have observers to our mailing list, although no active participants within it) George Kirikos:Sounds good, Petter. Philip Corwin:I don't see any need rto specifically invite them to present to us. They are free to attend and to make comments. Paul Tattersfield:Agree Petter, I think we should hold off on the report if necessary we have fully dealt with the small group proposal George Kirikos:Are we at 1 pm (Eastern time) next week too? George Kirikos:Bye folks. Osvaldo Novoa:Bye Paul Tattersfield:thanks bye Lori Schulman:ciao