Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team
Dear all, Following consultation with Paul McGrady, the interim chair for this RPM Sub Team, staff is pleased to confirm the next call for the Sub Team as well as to request, on Paul’s behalf, that Sub Team members provide input and responses to the action items noted below before Friday 21 July 2017. 1. Next Sub Team meeting The next Sub Team call is being planned for next Friday, 21 July 2017, at 1600 UTC for one hour. Please look out for the calendar invitation and call details in your Inbox shortly. 1. Action items/topics for mailing list discussion before the next call Please be so kind as to take time before next Friday to do the following: * Review the action items from our first call (from 14 June): https://community.icann.org/x/UU3wAw * Review the “reverse redline” prepared by staff at the Sub Team’s request, showing all the proposed deletions, comments and suggestions made – with a view toward providing your feedback on the proposed deletions, suggested edits, and questions noted in the Comment Boxes in the document before next Friday: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66080081/Additional%20Marke... Finally, we note that the Sub Team had agreed to keep open the call for volunteers for co-chair for this team at the last call. As it has been several weeks since that call, please make sure that you nominate anyone who may wish to serve alongside Paul as co-chair of the Sub Team by the end of this week. If no other co-chair is named, staff will proceed to confirm Paul’s position as Sub Team chair with the Working Group co-chairs. Thanks and cheers Mary
Hello members of the Additional Marketplate RPM Sub Team, This note is intended just to draw your attention to the need to review and discuss the “reverse redline” document concerning the scope of our work, as well as to complete the Action Items from our first call. The message below contains a link to the “reverse redline” document for your review. If you can, please send your comments to this mailing list before our call this Friday. Additionally, since no one else has been nominated or has come forward to seek a co-chair position on this Sub Team, staff will follow up with the Working Group co-chairs to confirm that Paul McGrady is the sole chair of this Sub Team. Thanks and cheers Mary From: Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 15:07 To: "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org> Subject: Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team Dear all, Following consultation with Paul McGrady, the interim chair for this RPM Sub Team, staff is pleased to confirm the next call for the Sub Team as well as to request, on Paul’s behalf, that Sub Team members provide input and responses to the action items noted below before Friday 21 July 2017. 1. Next Sub Team meeting The next Sub Team call is being planned for next Friday, 21 July 2017, at 1600 UTC for one hour. Please look out for the calendar invitation and call details in your Inbox shortly. 1. Action items/topics for mailing list discussion before the next call Please be so kind as to take time before next Friday to do the following: * Review the action items from our first call (from 14 June): https://community.icann.org/x/UU3wAw * Review the “reverse redline” prepared by staff at the Sub Team’s request, showing all the proposed deletions, comments and suggestions made – with a view toward providing your feedback on the proposed deletions, suggested edits, and questions noted in the Comment Boxes in the document before next Friday: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66080081/Additional%20Marke... Finally, we note that the Sub Team had agreed to keep open the call for volunteers for co-chair for this team at the last call. As it has been several weeks since that call, please make sure that you nominate anyone who may wish to serve alongside Paul as co-chair of the Sub Team by the end of this week. If no other co-chair is named, staff will proceed to confirm Paul’s position as Sub Team chair with the Working Group co-chairs. Thanks and cheers Mary
Thank you, Mary. I have one comment and one question: - I believe Question 7 should not be deleted. I feel it will be helpful to the WG’s overall understanding of RPMs to know whether a given marketplace RPM has been subject to approval review and, if so, the criteria used in such evaluation. This information would help the WG evaluate whether private RPMs are, in any cases, at risk of operating improperly (for example, in an arbitrary, overbearing, or unreliable manner). - Do group members believe that Question 4 encompasses such information as the scope of each marketplace RPM and the fees charged for such services? If not, should this be added as a separate question? I feel this information is also important to our understanding of the marketplace RPM landscape. I look forward to speaking with everyone tomorrow. Regards, Steve [cid:1AA096CA-874A-453A-90F3-99D5DD36CE4D] Steven M. Levy, Esq. Accent Law Group, Inc. 301 Fulton St. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19147 United States Phone: +1-215-327-9094 Email: slevy@AccentLawGroup.com<mailto:slevy@accentlawgroup.com> Website: www.AccentLawGroup.com<http://www.accentlawgroup.com/> <http://www.accentlawgroup.com/>LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/stevelevy43a/<http://www.linkedin.com/in/stevelevy43a/> From: <gnso-rpm-protection-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 at 12:49 PM To: "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-protection] Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team Hello members of the Additional Marketplate RPM Sub Team, This note is intended just to draw your attention to the need to review and discuss the “reverse redline” document concerning the scope of our work, as well as to complete the Action Items from our first call. The message below contains a link to the “reverse redline” document for your review. If you can, please send your comments to this mailing list before our call this Friday. Additionally, since no one else has been nominated or has come forward to seek a co-chair position on this Sub Team, staff will follow up with the Working Group co-chairs to confirm that Paul McGrady is the sole chair of this Sub Team. Thanks and cheers Mary From: Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 15:07 To: "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team Dear all, Following consultation with Paul McGrady, the interim chair for this RPM Sub Team, staff is pleased to confirm the next call for the Sub Team as well as to request, on Paul’s behalf, that Sub Team members provide input and responses to the action items noted below before Friday 21 July 2017. 1. Next Sub Team meeting The next Sub Team call is being planned for next Friday, 21 July 2017, at 1600 UTC for one hour. Please look out for the calendar invitation and call details in your Inbox shortly. 1. Action items/topics for mailing list discussion before the next call Please be so kind as to take time before next Friday to do the following: * Review the action items from our first call (from 14 June): https://community.icann.org/x/UU3wAw * Review the “reverse redline” prepared by staff at the Sub Team’s request, showing all the proposed deletions, comments and suggestions made – with a view toward providing your feedback on the proposed deletions, suggested edits, and questions noted in the Comment Boxes in the document before next Friday: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66080081/Additional%20Marke... Finally, we note that the Sub Team had agreed to keep open the call for volunteers for co-chair for this team at the last call. As it has been several weeks since that call, please make sure that you nominate anyone who may wish to serve alongside Paul as co-chair of the Sub Team by the end of this week. If no other co-chair is named, staff will proceed to confirm Paul’s position as Sub Team chair with the Working Group co-chairs. Thanks and cheers Mary
I disagree with Steve here.
This information would help the WG evaluate whether private RPMs are, in any cases, at risk of operating improperly (for example, in an arbitrary, overbearing, or unreliable manner).
Again, this group is not evaluating private RPMs and whether they are operating properly or improperly. This is an information gathering exercise to educate the WG -- we are not looking at whether a particular service is considered by a WG member to be "arbitrary, overbearing or unreliable" -- whatever that means. This type of review is outside of our charter. Jon
On Jul 20, 2017, at 6:16 PM, Steve Levy <slevy@accentlawgroup.com> wrote:
Thank you, Mary.
I have one comment and one question:
- I believe Question 7 should not be deleted. I feel it will be helpful to the WG’s overall understanding of RPMs to know whether a given marketplace RPM has been subject to approval review and, if so, the criteria used in such evaluation. This information would help the WG evaluate whether private RPMs are, in any cases, at risk of operating improperly (for example, in an arbitrary, overbearing, or unreliable manner).
- Do group members believe that Question 4 encompasses such information as the scope of each marketplace RPM and the fees charged for such services? If not, should this be added as a separate question? I feel this information is also important to our understanding of the marketplace RPM landscape.
I look forward to speaking with everyone tomorrow.
Regards, Steve
<Accent Law Logo NEW Very Small.png> Steven M. Levy, Esq. Accent Law Group, Inc. 301 Fulton St. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19147 United States Phone: +1-215-327-9094 Email: slevy@AccentLawGroup.com <mailto:slevy@accentlawgroup.com> Website: www.AccentLawGroup.com <http://www.accentlawgroup.com/> <http://www.accentlawgroup.com/>LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/stevelevy43a/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/stevelevy43a/>
From: <gnso-rpm-protection-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rpm-protection-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org <mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 at 12:49 PM To: "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-protection] Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team
Hello members of the Additional Marketplate RPM Sub Team,
This note is intended just to draw your attention to the need to review and discuss the “reverse redline” document concerning the scope of our work, as well as to complete the Action Items from our first call. The message below contains a link to the “reverse redline” document for your review. If you can, please send your comments to this mailing list before our call this Friday.
Additionally, since no one else has been nominated or has come forward to seek a co-chair position on this Sub Team, staff will follow up with the Working Group co-chairs to confirm that Paul McGrady is the sole chair of this Sub Team.
Thanks and cheers Mary
From: Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org <mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 15:07 To: "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team
Dear all,
Following consultation with Paul McGrady, the interim chair for this RPM Sub Team, staff is pleased to confirm the next call for the Sub Team as well as to request, on Paul’s behalf, that Sub Team members provide input and responses to the action items noted below before Friday 21 July 2017.
Next Sub Team meeting The next Sub Team call is being planned for next Friday, 21 July 2017, at 1600 UTC for one hour. Please look out for the calendar invitation and call details in your Inbox shortly.
Action items/topics for mailing list discussion before the next call Please be so kind as to take time before next Friday to do the following: Review the action items from our first call (from 14 June): https://community.icann.org/x/UU3wAw <https://community.icann.org/x/UU3wAw> Review the “reverse redline” prepared by staff at the Sub Team’s request, showing all the proposed deletions, comments and suggestions made – with a view toward providing your feedback on the proposed deletions, suggested edits, and questions noted in the Comment Boxes in the document before next Friday:https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66080081/Additional%20Marke... <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66080081/Additional%20Marke...>
Finally, we note that the Sub Team had agreed to keep open the call for volunteers for co-chair for this team at the last call. As it has been several weeks since that call, please make sure that you nominate anyone who may wish to serve alongside Paul as co-chair of the Sub Team by the end of this week. If no other co-chair is named, staff will proceed to confirm Paul’s position as Sub Team chair with the Working Group co-chairs.
Thanks and cheers Mary _______________________________________________ Gnso-rpm-protection mailing list Gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-protection
Hi Jon, Please don’t take my comment as any sort of veiled accusation against Donuts DPML. It was absolutely not intended in that way and I apologize for not setting out my views in more detail. My point is simply that I feel our WG should err on the side of having full information on marketplace RPMs to fulfill its charter of evaluating all RPMs in general (formal, marketplace, and otherwise). The WG can then use this information to discuss whether it feels that all marketplace RPMs should be held to some minimum standards to balance the protection of both brand owners and good-faith registrants. In that event, I have no doubt that Donuts’ services would more than meet such standards. Regards, Steve From: Jon Nevett <jon@donuts.email<mailto:jon@donuts.email>> Date: Friday, July 21, 2017 at 9:06 AM To: "Steven M. Levy, Esq." <slevy@accentlawgroup.com<mailto:slevy@accentlawgroup.com>> Cc: Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>>, "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-protection] Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team I disagree with Steve here. This information would help the WG evaluate whether private RPMs are, in any cases, at risk of operating improperly (for example, in an arbitrary, overbearing, or unreliable manner). Again, this group is not evaluating private RPMs and whether they are operating properly or improperly. This is an information gathering exercise to educate the WG -- we are not looking at whether a particular service is considered by a WG member to be "arbitrary, overbearing or unreliable" -- whatever that means. This type of review is outside of our charter. Jon On Jul 20, 2017, at 6:16 PM, Steve Levy <slevy@accentlawgroup.com<mailto:slevy@accentlawgroup.com>> wrote: Thank you, Mary. I have one comment and one question: - I believe Question 7 should not be deleted. I feel it will be helpful to the WG’s overall understanding of RPMs to know whether a given marketplace RPM has been subject to approval review and, if so, the criteria used in such evaluation. This information would help the WG evaluate whether private RPMs are, in any cases, at risk of operating improperly (for example, in an arbitrary, overbearing, or unreliable manner). - Do group members believe that Question 4 encompasses such information as the scope of each marketplace RPM and the fees charged for such services? If not, should this be added as a separate question? I feel this information is also important to our understanding of the marketplace RPM landscape. I look forward to speaking with everyone tomorrow. Regards, Steve <Accent Law Logo NEW Very Small.png> Steven M. Levy, Esq. Accent Law Group, Inc. 301 Fulton St. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19147 United States Phone: +1-215-327-9094 Email: slevy@AccentLawGroup.com<mailto:slevy@accentlawgroup.com> Website: www.AccentLawGroup.com<http://www.accentlawgroup.com/> <http://www.accentlawgroup.com/>LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/stevelevy43a/<http://www.linkedin.com/in/stevelevy43a/> From: <gnso-rpm-protection-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 at 12:49 PM To: "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-protection] Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team Hello members of the Additional Marketplate RPM Sub Team, This note is intended just to draw your attention to the need to review and discuss the “reverse redline” document concerning the scope of our work, as well as to complete the Action Items from our first call. The message below contains a link to the “reverse redline” document for your review. If you can, please send your comments to this mailing list before our call this Friday. Additionally, since no one else has been nominated or has come forward to seek a co-chair position on this Sub Team, staff will follow up with the Working Group co-chairs to confirm that Paul McGrady is the sole chair of this Sub Team. Thanks and cheers Mary From: Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 15:07 To: "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team Dear all, Following consultation with Paul McGrady, the interim chair for this RPM Sub Team, staff is pleased to confirm the next call for the Sub Team as well as to request, on Paul’s behalf, that Sub Team members provide input and responses to the action items noted below before Friday 21 July 2017. 1. Next Sub Team meeting The next Sub Team call is being planned for next Friday, 21 July 2017, at 1600 UTC for one hour. Please look out for the calendar invitation and call details in your Inbox shortly. 1. Action items/topics for mailing list discussion before the next call Please be so kind as to take time before next Friday to do the following: * Review the action items from our first call (from 14 June): https://community.icann.org/x/UU3wAw * Review the “reverse redline” prepared by staff at the Sub Team’s request, showing all the proposed deletions, comments and suggestions made – with a view toward providing your feedback on the proposed deletions, suggested edits, and questions noted in the Comment Boxes in the document before next Friday: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66080081/Additional%20Marke... Finally, we note that the Sub Team had agreed to keep open the call for volunteers for co-chair for this team at the last call. As it has been several weeks since that call, please make sure that you nominate anyone who may wish to serve alongside Paul as co-chair of the Sub Team by the end of this week. If no other co-chair is named, staff will proceed to confirm Paul’s position as Sub Team chair with the Working Group co-chairs. Thanks and cheers Mary _______________________________________________ Gnso-rpm-protection mailing list Gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-protection
Thanks Steve. There is a big gap between what you are suggesting, namely substantively evaluating the Additional Marketplace RPMs and introducing them to governance by ICANN, and what some on this group - including Jon Nevett I believe - thinks this group is for, namely understanding how the Additional Marketplace RPMs function so that when evaluating the ICANN-mandated RPMs, the broader WG will know whether or not the marketplace has already met a perceived need. We should discuss this on our call later this morning, since getting it clear what this group is about at the beginning will define whether or not we are successful. Best, Paul From: gnso-rpm-protection-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-protection-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Steve Levy Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 9:01 AM To: Jon Nevett <jon@donuts.email>; gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-protection] Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team Hi Jon, Please don't take my comment as any sort of veiled accusation against Donuts DPML. It was absolutely not intended in that way and I apologize for not setting out my views in more detail. My point is simply that I feel our WG should err on the side of having full information on marketplace RPMs to fulfill its charter of evaluating all RPMs in general (formal, marketplace, and otherwise). The WG can then use this information to discuss whether it feels that all marketplace RPMs should be held to some minimum standards to balance the protection of both brand owners and good-faith registrants. In that event, I have no doubt that Donuts' services would more than meet such standards. Regards, Steve From: Jon Nevett <jon@donuts.email<mailto:jon@donuts.email>> Date: Friday, July 21, 2017 at 9:06 AM To: "Steven M. Levy, Esq." <slevy@accentlawgroup.com<mailto:slevy@accentlawgroup.com>> Cc: Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>>, "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-protection] Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team I disagree with Steve here. This information would help the WG evaluate whether private RPMs are, in any cases, at risk of operating improperly (for example, in an arbitrary, overbearing, or unreliable manner). Again, this group is not evaluating private RPMs and whether they are operating properly or improperly. This is an information gathering exercise to educate the WG -- we are not looking at whether a particular service is considered by a WG member to be "arbitrary, overbearing or unreliable" -- whatever that means. This type of review is outside of our charter. Jon On Jul 20, 2017, at 6:16 PM, Steve Levy <slevy@accentlawgroup.com<mailto:slevy@accentlawgroup.com>> wrote: Thank you, Mary. I have one comment and one question: - I believe Question 7 should not be deleted. I feel it will be helpful to the WG's overall understanding of RPMs to know whether a given marketplace RPM has been subject to approval review and, if so, the criteria used in such evaluation. This information would help the WG evaluate whether private RPMs are, in any cases, at risk of operating improperly (for example, in an arbitrary, overbearing, or unreliable manner). - Do group members believe that Question 4 encompasses such information as the scope of each marketplace RPM and the fees charged for such services? If not, should this be added as a separate question? I feel this information is also important to our understanding of the marketplace RPM landscape. I look forward to speaking with everyone tomorrow. Regards, Steve <Accent Law Logo NEW Very Small.png> Steven M. Levy, Esq. Accent Law Group, Inc. 301 Fulton St. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19147 United States Phone: +1-215-327-9094 Email: slevy@AccentLawGroup.com<mailto:slevy@accentlawgroup.com> Website: www.AccentLawGroup.com<http://www.accentlawgroup.com/> LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/stevelevy43a/<http://www.linkedin.com/in/stevelevy43a/> From: <gnso-rpm-protection-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 at 12:49 PM To: "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-protection] Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team Hello members of the Additional Marketplate RPM Sub Team, This note is intended just to draw your attention to the need to review and discuss the "reverse redline" document concerning the scope of our work, as well as to complete the Action Items from our first call. The message below contains a link to the "reverse redline" document for your review. If you can, please send your comments to this mailing list before our call this Friday. Additionally, since no one else has been nominated or has come forward to seek a co-chair position on this Sub Team, staff will follow up with the Working Group co-chairs to confirm that Paul McGrady is the sole chair of this Sub Team. Thanks and cheers Mary From: Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 15:07 To: "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team Dear all, Following consultation with Paul McGrady, the interim chair for this RPM Sub Team, staff is pleased to confirm the next call for the Sub Team as well as to request, on Paul's behalf, that Sub Team members provide input and responses to the action items noted below before Friday 21 July 2017. (1) Next Sub Team meeting The next Sub Team call is being planned for next Friday, 21 July 2017, at 1600 UTC for one hour. Please look out for the calendar invitation and call details in your Inbox shortly. (2) Action items/topics for mailing list discussion before the next call Please be so kind as to take time before next Friday to do the following: ? Review the action items from our first call (from 14 June): https://community.icann.org/x/UU3wAw ? Review the "reverse redline" prepared by staff at the Sub Team's request, showing all the proposed deletions, comments and suggestions made - with a view toward providing your feedback on the proposed deletions, suggested edits, and questions noted in the Comment Boxes in the document before next Friday: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66080081/Additional%20Marke... Finally, we note that the Sub Team had agreed to keep open the call for volunteers for co-chair for this team at the last call. As it has been several weeks since that call, please make sure that you nominate anyone who may wish to serve alongside Paul as co-chair of the Sub Team by the end of this week. If no other co-chair is named, staff will proceed to confirm Paul's position as Sub Team chair with the Working Group co-chairs. Thanks and cheers Mary _______________________________________________ Gnso-rpm-protection mailing list Gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-protection ________________________________ The contents of this message may be privileged and confidential. If this message has been received in error, please delete it without reading it. Your receipt of this message is not intended to waive any applicable privilege. Please do not disseminate this message without the permission of the author. Any tax advice contained in this email was not intended to be used, and cannot be used, by you (or any other taxpayer) to avoid penalties under applicable tax laws and regulations.
Steve: Thanks for your reassurance. Greatly appreciated. With that said, this group is not empowered to set minimum standards for the marketplace RPMs as you suggest. Our recommendations are limited in the Charter to the RPMs defined as "the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS); the Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) and the associated availability through the TMCH of Sunrise periods and the Trademark Claims notification service; and the Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedures (PDDRPs)." While we are gathering data on the marketplace RPMs for informational purposes as they impact the mandated RPMs listed above, we are not able to create policy related to the marketplace RPMs. Looking forward to discussing again on our call. Best, Jon
On Jul 21, 2017, at 10:00 AM, Steve Levy <slevy@accentlawgroup.com> wrote:
Hi Jon,
Please don’t take my comment as any sort of veiled accusation against Donuts DPML. It was absolutely not intended in that way and I apologize for not setting out my views in more detail.
My point is simply that I feel our WG should err on the side of having full information on marketplace RPMs to fulfill its charter of evaluating all RPMs in general (formal, marketplace, and otherwise). The WG can then use this information to discuss whether it feels that all marketplace RPMs should be held to some minimum standards to balance the protection of both brand owners and good-faith registrants. In that event, I have no doubt that Donuts’ services would more than meet such standards.
Regards, Steve
From: Jon Nevett <jon@donuts.email <mailto:jon@donuts.email>> Date: Friday, July 21, 2017 at 9:06 AM To: "Steven M. Levy, Esq." <slevy@accentlawgroup.com <mailto:slevy@accentlawgroup.com>> Cc: Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org <mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>>, "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-protection] Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team
I disagree with Steve here.
This information would help the WG evaluate whether private RPMs are, in any cases, at risk of operating improperly (for example, in an arbitrary, overbearing, or unreliable manner).
Again, this group is not evaluating private RPMs and whether they are operating properly or improperly. This is an information gathering exercise to educate the WG -- we are not looking at whether a particular service is considered by a WG member to be "arbitrary, overbearing or unreliable" -- whatever that means. This type of review is outside of our charter.
Jon
On Jul 20, 2017, at 6:16 PM, Steve Levy <slevy@accentlawgroup.com <mailto:slevy@accentlawgroup.com>> wrote:
Thank you, Mary.
I have one comment and one question:
- I believe Question 7 should not be deleted. I feel it will be helpful to the WG’s overall understanding of RPMs to know whether a given marketplace RPM has been subject to approval review and, if so, the criteria used in such evaluation. This information would help the WG evaluate whether private RPMs are, in any cases, at risk of operating improperly (for example, in an arbitrary, overbearing, or unreliable manner).
- Do group members believe that Question 4 encompasses such information as the scope of each marketplace RPM and the fees charged for such services? If not, should this be added as a separate question? I feel this information is also important to our understanding of the marketplace RPM landscape.
I look forward to speaking with everyone tomorrow.
Regards, Steve
<Accent Law Logo NEW Very Small.png> Steven M. Levy, Esq. Accent Law Group, Inc. 301 Fulton St. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19147 United States Phone: +1-215-327-9094 Email: slevy@AccentLawGroup.com <mailto:slevy@accentlawgroup.com> Website: www.AccentLawGroup.com <http://www.accentlawgroup.com/> <http://www.accentlawgroup.com/>LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/stevelevy43a/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/stevelevy43a/>
From: <gnso-rpm-protection-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rpm-protection-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org <mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 at 12:49 PM To: "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-protection] Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team
Hello members of the Additional Marketplate RPM Sub Team,
This note is intended just to draw your attention to the need to review and discuss the “reverse redline” document concerning the scope of our work, as well as to complete the Action Items from our first call. The message below contains a link to the “reverse redline” document for your review. If you can, please send your comments to this mailing list before our call this Friday.
Additionally, since no one else has been nominated or has come forward to seek a co-chair position on this Sub Team, staff will follow up with the Working Group co-chairs to confirm that Paul McGrady is the sole chair of this Sub Team.
Thanks and cheers Mary
From: Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org <mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 15:07 To: "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team
Dear all,
Following consultation with Paul McGrady, the interim chair for this RPM Sub Team, staff is pleased to confirm the next call for the Sub Team as well as to request, on Paul’s behalf, that Sub Team members provide input and responses to the action items noted below before Friday 21 July 2017.
Next Sub Team meeting The next Sub Team call is being planned for next Friday, 21 July 2017, at 1600 UTC for one hour. Please look out for the calendar invitation and call details in your Inbox shortly.
Action items/topics for mailing list discussion before the next call Please be so kind as to take time before next Friday to do the following: Review the action items from our first call (from 14 June): https://community.icann.org/x/UU3wAw <https://community.icann.org/x/UU3wAw> Review the “reverse redline” prepared by staff at the Sub Team’s request, showing all the proposed deletions, comments and suggestions made – with a view toward providing your feedback on the proposed deletions, suggested edits, and questions noted in the Comment Boxes in the document before next Friday: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66080081/Additional%20Marke... <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66080081/Additional%20Marke...>
Finally, we note that the Sub Team had agreed to keep open the call for volunteers for co-chair for this team at the last call. As it has been several weeks since that call, please make sure that you nominate anyone who may wish to serve alongside Paul as co-chair of the Sub Team by the end of this week. If no other co-chair is named, staff will proceed to confirm Paul’s position as Sub Team chair with the Working Group co-chairs.
Thanks and cheers Mary _______________________________________________ Gnso-rpm-protection mailing list Gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-protection <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-protection>
Thanks, Jon. Sorry for not responding to your email before the call but I’m glad we were able to discuss this issue of scope a bit further. I still support keeping Q.7 and I don’t feel it crosses any boundaries to simply ask the question of what ICANN approval process is required. In fact, the current wording of the question even contemplates that the answer may be “none”. But I feel it’s important to at least ask the question. As to answering the question or creating policy related to marketplace RPMs, I realize that’s not for our sub-team to do. However, I’m curious to hear others’ perspectives on whether both brand owners and registrants would be reassured of the quality and value of marketplace RPMs if some minimum standards were in place. Would this “seal of approval” approach actually increase sales of these services and reduce the type of misunderstandings that have occurred in the past? What are the downsides to requiring approval (delay? administrative cost?) Happy to continue the conversation. Regards, Steve From: Jon Nevett <jon@donuts.email<mailto:jon@donuts.email>> Date: Friday, July 21, 2017 at 10:51 AM To: "Steven M. Levy, Esq." <slevy@accentlawgroup.com<mailto:slevy@accentlawgroup.com>> Cc: "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-protection] Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team Steve: Thanks for your reassurance. Greatly appreciated. With that said, this group is not empowered to set minimum standards for the marketplace RPMs as you suggest. Our recommendations are limited in the Charter to the RPMs defined as "the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS); the Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) and the associated availability through the TMCH of Sunrise periods and the Trademark Claims notification service; and the Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedures (PDDRPs)." While we are gathering data on the marketplace RPMs for informational purposes as they impact the mandated RPMs listed above, we are not able to create policy related to the marketplace RPMs. Looking forward to discussing again on our call. Best, Jon On Jul 21, 2017, at 10:00 AM, Steve Levy <slevy@accentlawgroup.com<mailto:slevy@accentlawgroup.com>> wrote: Hi Jon, Please don’t take my comment as any sort of veiled accusation against Donuts DPML. It was absolutely not intended in that way and I apologize for not setting out my views in more detail. My point is simply that I feel our WG should err on the side of having full information on marketplace RPMs to fulfill its charter of evaluating all RPMs in general (formal, marketplace, and otherwise). The WG can then use this information to discuss whether it feels that all marketplace RPMs should be held to some minimum standards to balance the protection of both brand owners and good-faith registrants. In that event, I have no doubt that Donuts’ services would more than meet such standards. Regards, Steve From: Jon Nevett <jon@donuts.email<mailto:jon@donuts.email>> Date: Friday, July 21, 2017 at 9:06 AM To: "Steven M. Levy, Esq." <slevy@accentlawgroup.com<mailto:slevy@accentlawgroup.com>> Cc: Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>>, "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-protection] Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team I disagree with Steve here. This information would help the WG evaluate whether private RPMs are, in any cases, at risk of operating improperly (for example, in an arbitrary, overbearing, or unreliable manner). Again, this group is not evaluating private RPMs and whether they are operating properly or improperly. This is an information gathering exercise to educate the WG -- we are not looking at whether a particular service is considered by a WG member to be "arbitrary, overbearing or unreliable" -- whatever that means. This type of review is outside of our charter. Jon On Jul 20, 2017, at 6:16 PM, Steve Levy <slevy@accentlawgroup.com<mailto:slevy@accentlawgroup.com>> wrote: Thank you, Mary. I have one comment and one question: - I believe Question 7 should not be deleted. I feel it will be helpful to the WG’s overall understanding of RPMs to know whether a given marketplace RPM has been subject to approval review and, if so, the criteria used in such evaluation. This information would help the WG evaluate whether private RPMs are, in any cases, at risk of operating improperly (for example, in an arbitrary, overbearing, or unreliable manner). - Do group members believe that Question 4 encompasses such information as the scope of each marketplace RPM and the fees charged for such services? If not, should this be added as a separate question? I feel this information is also important to our understanding of the marketplace RPM landscape. I look forward to speaking with everyone tomorrow. Regards, Steve <Accent Law Logo NEW Very Small.png> Steven M. Levy, Esq. Accent Law Group, Inc. 301 Fulton St. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19147 United States Phone: +1-215-327-9094 Email: slevy@AccentLawGroup.com<mailto:slevy@accentlawgroup.com> Website: www.AccentLawGroup.com<http://www.accentlawgroup.com/> <http://www.accentlawgroup.com/>LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/stevelevy43a/<http://www.linkedin.com/in/stevelevy43a/> From: <gnso-rpm-protection-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 at 12:49 PM To: "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-protection] Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team Hello members of the Additional Marketplate RPM Sub Team, This note is intended just to draw your attention to the need to review and discuss the “reverse redline” document concerning the scope of our work, as well as to complete the Action Items from our first call. The message below contains a link to the “reverse redline” document for your review. If you can, please send your comments to this mailing list before our call this Friday. Additionally, since no one else has been nominated or has come forward to seek a co-chair position on this Sub Team, staff will follow up with the Working Group co-chairs to confirm that Paul McGrady is the sole chair of this Sub Team. Thanks and cheers Mary From: Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 15:07 To: "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team Dear all, Following consultation with Paul McGrady, the interim chair for this RPM Sub Team, staff is pleased to confirm the next call for the Sub Team as well as to request, on Paul’s behalf, that Sub Team members provide input and responses to the action items noted below before Friday 21 July 2017. 1. Next Sub Team meeting The next Sub Team call is being planned for next Friday, 21 July 2017, at 1600 UTC for one hour. Please look out for the calendar invitation and call details in your Inbox shortly. 1. Action items/topics for mailing list discussion before the next call Please be so kind as to take time before next Friday to do the following: * Review the action items from our first call (from 14 June): https://community.icann.org/x/UU3wAw * Review the “reverse redline” prepared by staff at the Sub Team’s request, showing all the proposed deletions, comments and suggestions made – with a view toward providing your feedback on the proposed deletions, suggested edits, and questions noted in the Comment Boxes in the document before next Friday: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66080081/Additional%20Marke... Finally, we note that the Sub Team had agreed to keep open the call for volunteers for co-chair for this team at the last call. As it has been several weeks since that call, please make sure that you nominate anyone who may wish to serve alongside Paul as co-chair of the Sub Team by the end of this week. If no other co-chair is named, staff will proceed to confirm Paul’s position as Sub Team chair with the Working Group co-chairs. Thanks and cheers Mary _______________________________________________ Gnso-rpm-protection mailing list Gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-protection
Hi all, looking forward to our call later today. Regarding re-wording question 1(a), perhaps we could amend the questions 1(a) and 1(b) as follows, with the current 1(c) then becoming 1(b): 1. What information on the following aspects of the operation of the TMCH is available and where can it be found? (a) Existing services offered by the TMCH which are not mandated by the ICANN RPMs requirements, including: i) the post-90 days Ongoing Notifications service; ii) services in support of registry-specific offerings; and iii) other services, if any. (b) With whom does the TMCH share data and for what purposes? In considering this question the WG should take into account and avoid duplicating its work undertaken in reviewing the TMCH. Would this address the concerns expressed on the last call? I have not commented on the “reverse redline” since these proposals came from me or from Jon Nevett (which I had already reviewed and commented on). Susan Payne Head of Legal Policy | Valideus Ltd E: susan.payne@valideus.com<mailto:susan.payne@valideus.com> D: +44 20 7421 8255 T: +44 20 7421 8299 M: +44 7971 661175 From: gnso-rpm-protection-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-protection-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: 19 July 2017 17:50 To: gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-protection] Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team Hello members of the Additional Marketplate RPM Sub Team, This note is intended just to draw your attention to the need to review and discuss the “reverse redline” document concerning the scope of our work, as well as to complete the Action Items from our first call. The message below contains a link to the “reverse redline” document for your review. If you can, please send your comments to this mailing list before our call this Friday. Additionally, since no one else has been nominated or has come forward to seek a co-chair position on this Sub Team, staff will follow up with the Working Group co-chairs to confirm that Paul McGrady is the sole chair of this Sub Team. Thanks and cheers Mary From: Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 15:07 To: "gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-protection@icann.org>> Subject: Discussion items for next call of the Additional Marketplace RPMs Sub Team Dear all, Following consultation with Paul McGrady, the interim chair for this RPM Sub Team, staff is pleased to confirm the next call for the Sub Team as well as to request, on Paul’s behalf, that Sub Team members provide input and responses to the action items noted below before Friday 21 July 2017. (1) Next Sub Team meeting The next Sub Team call is being planned for next Friday, 21 July 2017, at 1600 UTC for one hour. Please look out for the calendar invitation and call details in your Inbox shortly. (2) Action items/topics for mailing list discussion before the next call Please be so kind as to take time before next Friday to do the following: * Review the action items from our first call (from 14 June): https://community.icann.org/x/UU3wAw * Review the “reverse redline” prepared by staff at the Sub Team’s request, showing all the proposed deletions, comments and suggestions made – with a view toward providing your feedback on the proposed deletions, suggested edits, and questions noted in the Comment Boxes in the document before next Friday: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66080081/Additional%20Marke... Finally, we note that the Sub Team had agreed to keep open the call for volunteers for co-chair for this team at the last call. As it has been several weeks since that call, please make sure that you nominate anyone who may wish to serve alongside Paul as co-chair of the Sub Team by the end of this week. If no other co-chair is named, staff will proceed to confirm Paul’s position as Sub Team chair with the Working Group co-chairs. Thanks and cheers Mary
participants (5)
-
icannlists -
Jon Nevett -
Mary Wong -
Steve Levy -
Susan Payne