Dear All, Please find the attendance of the call attached to this email. The MP3, Adobe Connect recording and Adobe Connect chat below for the Sub Team for Additional Marketplace RPMs call on Friday, 08 September 2017 at 16:00 UTC. Attendance and recordings of the call are also posted on agenda wiki page: MP3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-marketplace-rpm-08sep17-en.mp3 Adobe Connect recording: https://participate.icann.org/p7vkrer4h6b/ The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar[gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMFAg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=QiF-05YzARosRvTYd84AB_UYInlydmFcjNmBM5XgySw&m=PFpB-ztyZLUAAnXOX9y_p1wsu5KdiKi0m_1qr3qRnA0&s=pn5u28Q_u0cXQWKC94ecGoBfvu1FKXSd7xgx7fKD9WY&e=> ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-protection/ Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle Adobe Connect chat transcript for 08 September 2017: Michelle DeSmyter:Dear All, Welcome to the Sub Team for Additional Marketplace RPMs meeting on Friday, 08 September 2017 at 16:00 UTC. Michelle DeSmyter:Agenda wiki page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_v... Paul McGrady:Proposed Agenda: 1. Claudio's Proposed Changes to Q5 (from list); 2. Requesto to Archive Deleted Questions; 3. Finish Review of Remaining Questions Mary Wong:@Paul, thanks for the agenda - we have pasted it into the Agenda pod on the right. Mary Wong:Plus the text suggested by Claudio as well Steve Levy:Hi folks Mary Wong:Claudio's suggestion is in the Agenda pod on the right Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Addition was "and to what extent, " Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Original question: How does use of the Protected Marks Lists (e.g. blocking services) affect the utilization of other RPMs? Mary Wong:Because it (Q5) was agreed to be an overarching question Kathy:Edits fine Susan Payne:happy Brian Cimbolic:what is the point (generally) of archiving questions? Mary Wong:They would stay in the document, but not in the main text for consideration, just as FYI to the rest of the WG. Brian Cimbolic:thanks Paul Jon Nevett:I want to add some more questions if we are going to archive Susan Payne:strongly agree with Kristine. We will still have old versions of the document available in the wiki should anyone desire to look at it Jon Nevett:How wonderful are Additional Marketplace RPMs? Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:@Phill, I think it elevates "rejected questions" above those of other questions. As you pointed out, people can always go back and compare. Jon Nevett:Kristine/Susan +1 Mary Wong:Will it help if staff archives all deleted questions from all sub teams on the wiki? Mary Wong:i.e. we can create a specific page for all questions that were discussed and agreed to be deleted from WG consideration. Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:@Mary, I think it's a good offer, but it really dilutes the wheat with way too much chaff Philip Corwin:I presumed that "archived" would be a simple listing of rejected questions and a short note why would simply be to note the subteam's decison, not to keep them alive Mary Wong:All, note that there are two additional sections currently in the document - one is "deferred" (by sub team agreement at Kathy's request from a few weeks ago and its fate still needs to be determined); the second is "archived" (as in agreed that it is a deleted question). David McAuley:I agree w/Mary's idea and Jon's comment - seems a sensible middle ground Greg Shatan:Agree with Jon. David McAuley:But Kathy's point is also good if indeed we determined to send some Q's up to full group Philip Corwin:What Jon suggests seems reasonable -- so long as there is somewhere where WG members or others can see what the subteam discarded and a short rationale. Frankly I think it strengtnens the subteam's work product to do so. Mary Wong:Do you want them for all 3 sub teams or just this one? Philip Corwin:I support Jon's suggestion with his caveat that there be a link in the document to the wiki where the rejected questions are listed Greg Shatan:Agree with Jon's distinction. So let's not forget it when th doc is revised for public consumption. Susan Payne:+1 Greg jeff neuman:I dont really understand the questions Brian Cimbolic:+1 Kristine Mary Wong:As staff noted last week, ICANN doesn't support any of the Additional RPMs which are offered voluntarily by some ROs. Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I'll also reiterate my suggestion from last week that this is at least "related to" question 2. I won't dig into "is covered by" at this point, which I think as my original positition. Mary Wong:@Kristine, yes, one suggestion from last week was to move this question (possibly rephrased) into a subpart of Q2 Jon Nevett:No whammies, Greg Susan Payne:a good point Greg - although I don't think the TMCH provider does so does it? Didnt we ask them that months ago? Mary Wong:@Greg, if you meant the Ancillary Services that the TMCH provider can offer, that IS covered by their contract with ICANN. However, these do NOT mean or include the Additional Marketplace RPMs. At the moment, the only approved Ancillary Service is the ongoing claims service. jeff neuman:Wouldnt it be more simple to ask the TMCH provider if they provide other services and if so do you use the TMCH database as part of those services? Kathy:+1 J. Scott Greg Shatan:@Mary, no I was referring to something else but I don't have the primary text at my. fingertips. Greg Shatan:But if nobody know WTF the question means it should go on the reject pile. Susan Payne:couldn't agree more Greg. we need to make it clear what we are asking or delete Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Agree, Greg. In any case, I think Q2 gets at 7(c). J. Scott Evans:I tend to agree with Greg. If the question raises too many questions or is open to various interpretatons, I think the flaws have been point out and it should be eliminated. J. Scott Evans:This is the value and purpose of having a sub-team review and stress test these questions jeff neuman:i agree with Kristine...this is covered in question 2. I move to put this in the rejection pile David McAuley:Maybe cut it away with Occam's razor? David McAuley:that is what I meant David McAuley:yes Greg Shatan:(stepping away) Mary Wong:@Kathy, that was not the question that is being asked, is it? Whether ICANN thinks we are subsidizing or whether the fees are being used by the TMCH provider for Additional RPMs? Surely that is a question we (ICANN) cannot answer. Susan Payne:ICANN pays for it? I thought TMowners and Registries were the ones stuck with the costs :) Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:+1 Susan Jon Nevett:Susan is right and even when "ICANN "pays for it, it is out of application fees Mary Wong:@Jeff, it does - as to the TMDB etc., the requirements in the AGB follow the STI recommendations. J. Scott Evans:I agree with the points that Jeff is making here. I think has succintly revealed the reasons this question should go. Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Agree Jeff, the question calls for a conclusion. jeff neuman:So the TMCP provider has agreed in its contract to follow the AGB? jeff neuman:If so, then it is a simple collection of facts: 1. What services does the TMCH provide, 2. How does it provide such services. 3. Does it use data from the TMCH database? Mary Wong:ICANN does not support or pay for voluntary RPMs offered by anyone, and we cannot opine on whether we are believed to be subsidizing these services. jeff neuman:Then based on the asnwers we make a conclusion Mary Wong:@Paul, give us a moment - we will look it up jeff neuman:you can even add a 4 and 5 to my questions. 4. Who are your customers? 5. How are the services paid for? Mary Wong:@Greg, is this more or less what you had in mind? From the final TMCH framework published in the final AGB: "The Clearinghouse will be required to separate its two primary functions: (i) authentication and validation of the trademarks in the Clearinghouse; and (ii) serving as a database to provide information to the new gTLD registries to support pre-launch Sunrise or Trademark Claims Services." Mary Wong:And "Trademark Clearinghouse Service Provider may provide ancillary services, as long as those services and any data used for those services are kept separate from the Clearinghouse database." Philip Corwin:To sum up, I think Q7 should be refined and clarified, not discarded J. Scott Evans:Query: Is an additional Registry Operator RPM an ancillary service of the TMCH? Mary Wong:@J Scott, no, not under its contract with ICANN Susan Payne:no Mary Wong:There is only one approved Ancillary Service at this time - the TMCH's provision of extended claims service. J. Scott Evans:It seems to me that those woulld be service offered directly to TMCH registrants and users from the TMCH provider jeff neuman:Is Ancillary Service a defined term in the contract? J. Scott Evans:IMHO, this just goes to show this questioh should be deleted J. Scott Evans:*question* Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Agree, J. Scott J. Scott Evans:Let's take a consensus vote on eliminating the c and d Mary Wong:@Jeff, I do not believe so but I can check. It is, however, clear that an ancillary service is something that the provider may offer (subject to ICANN approval) where TM owners have in fact opted for such services. The contract provides for a separate database for this purpose. Kathy:+ 1 Jeff Philip Corwin:If they are not ancilary services then what type of services are they? (this is a straightforward inquiry, not being argumentative) Mary Wong:To be clear, staff explanation of Ancillary Services is what is provided for in the contract with Deloitte - we have no opinion on what that phrase may mean outside that framework. jeff neuman:@Kathy - that is one interpretation of the term.... jeff neuman:but not everyones interpretation of what it means Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I think ancillary services are "anything other" than what ICANN hired the TMCH to operate. Kathy:Jeff - do you eant to give a short a rephrasing this question? Kathy:eant=> want Kathy:do you want to give a shot at rephrasing? Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:+1 Susan, I've been digging just not because I think we did ask and they did answer. I'm not finding it justnow. Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:not=now Philip Corwin:I am going to support 7 c and d with the caveat that they need to be rephrased to be better focused jeff neuman:Questions to both Deloitte and IBM: 1. What services do you provide to ICANN Registry Operators? 2. Does TMCH use any data from the Clearinghouse for the provision of such services? IF so, please explain. 3. How are you compensation for the provision of such services. jeff neuman:3. How are you compensated for the provision of such services jeff neuman:Then we as a group determine whether their answers are in compliance with the requirements Kathy:Jeff has already provided a revision... Mary Wong:@Jeff, we will note your suggestions as a possible rephrasing. David McAuley:I can agree w/Phil J. Scott Evans:come on folks express an opinion David McAuley:My mark is as mentioned by Phil J. Scott Evans:Thanks Paul for your leadership today. Mary Wong:ok thanks Paul J. Scott Evans:ciao David McAuley:Thanks Paul, Mary, and all Susan Payne:thanks all Steve Levy:Thanks all!