All,
On the call early this morning (for some of us), while we were discussing the goals/objectives to consider when selecting a mechanism of last resort to resolve string contention, a very important question was asked by a participant on the
call. The question demonstrated that what one person believes is “Bad Faith” other people may not believe is “bad faith” with respect to mechanisms to resolve contention sets.
So, with the e-mail chain, I would like for members of the Working Group to discuss what behaviors they would consider to be of the type that we would like to preclude? And by the same token, what are the types of activities that we know
we would like to allow.
For example, we believe from most of the comments that have come in as well as in our discussions, that some forms of private resolution have been deemed acceptable. This includes the creation of joint ventures between applicants (assuming
public comment, etc.), potentially revising applications to address concerns (eg., trademark owner agrees to withdraw its application if other applicant agrees to mitigate trademark abuse), 2 trademark owners agree to modify strings to enable both to have
their own TLDs (eg., .deltafaucets or .deltaair)), etc.
We have also heard from the ICANN Board that they may believe that participating in private auctions with the sole purpose of losing and using those to fund other auctions may not be as desirable.
Though the next call with not be on this topic, we did want to put this issue out on e-mail. Please discuss.
Thanks.
Jeff Neuman
Senior Vice President
Com Laude | Valideus
1751 Pinnacle Drive
Suite 600, McLean
VA 22102, USA
M: +1.202.549.5079
D: +1.703.635.7514
E:
jeff.neuman@comlaude.com
www.comlaude.com
![]()