May 2017 - Gnso-rpm-sunrise

Sunrise Questions - bringing wide ranging views together.
by Kathy Kleiman May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

Hi All, In lieu of our meeting on Friday, Kristine and I sat down by phone and worked through the Sunrise questions from a number of different perspectives. We covered as many of our our almost 2 dozen Sunrise questions as possible. We tried to keep, in as neutral as way as possible, the charter questions given to us by Council and the rewritten questions that bind together overarching concepts. We found two arcs we would like to suggest for the Sunrise questions: Arc 1) Trademark Owners and Registrant Issues and Arc 2) Trademark Owners and Registry Operator Issues. Everything seems to fall fairly neatly into those two categories. We replaced language that some members of the subteam objected to as confusing or meaning something else. I took the pen from there, and Kristine is still reviewing. In the interest of time, let me circulate these questions to the full subteam. Thoughts on next steps appreciated. Should we add these to the Wiki? Best, Kathy

5 5

Cancelling Today's Sunrise Registrations Sub Team Call - 26 May 2017
by Amr Elsadr May 26, 2017

May 26, 2017

Dear Sub Team Members, Having heard from a few of you on possibly cancelling today’s Sub Team call, and taking into consideration the already confirmed apologies, today’s Sunrise Registrations Sub Team call is cancelled. As has been noted, there are still open discussions on how the Sub Team will be delivering its output to the full Working Group. The Working Group Leadership Team had requested that both Sub Teams (Sunrise Registrations and Trademark Claims) complete the work on their respective Charter questions by 31 May. It seems fairly clear that more time will be required. However, between now and the next call, I encourage you all to continue the discussion that has already begun on the Sub Team mailing list. The next Sub Team call will be tentatively scheduled one week from today on Friday, 2 June at 14:00 UTC. Thanks. Amr

1 0

Summary of Progress on the Sunrise Registration Sub Team
by Amr Elsadr May 26, 2017

May 26, 2017

Dear Sub Team Members, Following up on an action item from last week’s call, staff were asked to clarify the changes made across the different iterations of the Charter questions/google doc tables concerning batching and refinements made to the original Charter questions. The purpose of this is to provide a summary of the work done by the Sub Team to-date, which staff hopes will be helpful in providing clarity on how the Sub Team is where it now is in terms of progress. This summary will cover 6 weeks of Sub Team deliberation and agreement. The initial list of questions are posted on the Sub Team’s meeting wiki page from 14 April<https://community.icann.org/x/dM7RAw>, and can be downloaded directly here<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64081524/Sunrise%20Claims%…>. On the Sub Team call on 21 April, the Sub Team instructed staff to batch and reorder questions 2, 3, 8 and 15, as well as 4, 5 and 6, and finally questions 7 and 9. This was done, and the questions were renumbered as 2A, 2B, 2D and 2C, then 3A, 3B and 3C, and finally 4A and 4B, all in respective order. These changes were listed in the column on the far left of this google doc<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NMlQRUyoMD271Xxu3_GqwkSeTGs2huW_5DqzgX1…>. Also, please refer to the action items on the Sub Team’s meeting wiki page from 21 April<https://community.icann.org/x/pNPRAw>. Further to those action items being completed, Sub Team members began to submit a number of comments and propose refinements/rewording of the original questions. These are all available in the same table, including a proposal to consolidate some of the batched questions. These proposals were subsequently discussed on the Sub Team call on 28 April. Agreements on consolidation of questions, as well as reordering them to follow the logic of the Sunrise process resulted in an updated table being set up. This table can be viewed here<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nm91bUcbX-PhA1imkKdOujWWRXsbyORq5a78Aqc…>, and the Sub Team members were asked to review this table, and provide comments to be discussed during the Sub Team’s 5 May call. On 5 May, staff were tasked with drawing up a third table taking into consideration the comments submitted and discussed by the Sub Team. The table was also to include the original Charter questions, and match them against the updated/refined versions in order to have the ability to demonstrate the changes made in a single table, keeping reporting the output of the Sub Team to the full Working Group in mind. Staff were also tasked with adding additional columns; one explaining the decisions made by the Sub Team resulting in the updates/refinements made, as well as a column in which available data and data required could be placed. The Sub Team also agreed to use color-codes to more clearly indicate which original Charter questions were batched and refined into which consolidated and refined/updated questions. This has resulted in the most recent version of the table/google doc<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1w1eAYmIBOZbhHRpN4mCVKgp97ycoadlxvE6Joa9…>. This is the working version of the table that the Sub Team is currently considering, and there are a number of agreed upon action items for Sub Team members to go through listed on the 19 May Sub Team meeting wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/DxHfAw> (last week’s Sub Team call). Please refer to these Sub Team action items at your earliest convenience. We hope this summary is helpful. Please also note that all action items, notes, meeting materials and documents, recordings and transcripts from Sub Team calls are posted regularly on dedicated pages for each call<https://community.icann.org/x/oMrRAw>. It is our (staff’s) hope that these wiki pages provide a reference for the ongoing progress of the Sub Team, which is helpful to both the Sub Team and the broader Working Group. Thanks. Amr

7 8

Action Items from Sunrise Registration Sub Team Call - 19 May 2017
by Amr Elsadr May 24, 2017

May 24, 2017

Dear Sub Team Members, Apologies for the late delivery on this, but please find below the action items from Friday’s call. The action items, notes, document, recordings and transcripts of the call are posted on the Sub Team’s meeting wiki page here: https://community.icann.org/x/DxHfAw Thanks, and again, apologies about the delay. Amr Action Items: 1. To cover concerns to registrants, Sub Team to suggest possible rewording of Question 1, batching it with other questions, or possibly suggest an additional question 2. Sub Team to follow up with Lori Schulman on data (examples) to answer Proposed Final Question 2 provided in the INTA survey results/report 3. Sub Team to consider adding a fourth bullet to Proposed Final Question 2 on registry operator practices other than pricing of Sunrise registrations and Premium Names, which may have a deterrent effect on brand owners’ use of Sunrise 4. Sub Team to follow up on outstanding action item regarding definitions for Premium Names, Reserved Names and Premium Sunrise Pricing on the mailing list 5. Sub Team to consider rewording of Proposed Final Question 3 to reflect that the effect on both trademark holders and registry operators needs to be considered, when discussing the impact on geoTLDs and QLPs when reserved names are registered in the TMCH 6. Sub Team to revise Final Proposed Questions (such as Final Proposed Question 4) to ensure that they incorporate the original Charter questions, and are asking questions that are practically answerable 7. Sub Team to look over the Proposed Final Question 6, which addresses the intended effect and effectiveness of Sunrise, and consider if it requires further refinement 8. Staff to circulate previous versions and current version of the google doc tables, so that Sub Team can track changes made

2 2

Recordings, attendance & AC Chat for Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) Sub Team for Sunrise Registrations call on Friday, 19 May 2017 at 14:00 UTC
by Michelle DeSmyter May 19, 2017

May 19, 2017

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 Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) Sub Team for Sunrise Registrations on Friday, 19 May 2017 at 14:00 UTC. Attendance of the call is posted on agenda wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/DxHfAw MP3: https://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-rpm-review-19may17-en.mp3 Adobe Connect recording: https://participate.icann.org/p65wcrce00a/ The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page:http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-sunrise/ Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/DxHfAw Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle Adobe Connect chat transcript for 19 May 2017: Michelle DeSmyter:Dear All, Welcome to the Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) Sub Team for Sunrise Registrations call on Friday, 19 May 2017 at 14:00 UTC. Michelle DeSmyter:Meeting agenda page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_… Mary Wong:Thanks for uploading the Google Doc - I had just PFD'd it! Amr Elsadr::-) Amr Elsadr:But like you said, it doesn't include Maxim's comments. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Hello All, Matt Mlsna:Hello Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):As I understand it is possible to print comments usign Griffin Barnett:Thanks Mary Griffin Barnett:Sounds good Matt Mlsna:Agreed Amr Elsadr:@Maxim: If I'm not mistaken, the only possible action on comments is to resolve them, which would remove them entirely. In the future, we could paste them into the comments/discussion column? Matt Mlsna:thanks :) Jeff Neuman:Hello. I have to leave early (at half past) as well Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):please pring Google doc to PDF again an upload to Adobe Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):*and Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):I included comments into the last column Amr Elsadr:Am doing that now, Maxim. See your comments in the columns. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):unortunately, last call was done during the flight time from the GDD summit for many Registries. Amr Elsadr:Action items, notes, recordings, transcripts, etc... from last week's call can be found here: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_… Griffin Barnett:+1 Kristine, fine to leave this question in, and a-is Griffin Barnett:*as-is Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Q1: as is Matt Mlsna:Agree leave as-is Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):I have a notice: Do we know if ICANN is have right to regulate prices? Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):*have the right Griffin Barnett:I'm personally comfortable with the reformulated Q2 Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):I suggest we request the answer from ICANN Legal. Amr Elsadr:I understood the question as Kristine does. I don't believe the intent was to recommend any pricing regulation via consensus policies. Griffin Barnett:Agree again with Kristine on this Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):if ICANN does not have right to regulate prices, then any kind of policy related to price regulation can not be implemented. Griffin Barnett:I think ICANN could regulate prices if policy recommendations demanded it - would require a change to the base RA presumably Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):I think we need to report to our whole RPM PDP WG that we might need the answer to this question (we can not request as a subgroup) Griffin Barnett:Doesn't ICANN regulate prices in legacy TLDs? Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):only increase of prices Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):and old contracts are irrelevent to new RAs Kathy Kleiman:Hi All! Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):*irrelevant Kathy Kleiman:Was a question dropped? Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):due to registries , as independant legal bodies are not responcible for actions of other non-affiliated legal bodies. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):*independent Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):we might need to reword question Q2 (to show that was it a pricing or any other reason which prevented you from Sunrise registration?) Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):and we need to add " any additional reasons: please write more about it" Griffin Barnett:Or perhaps we add a sub-question saying "Were there other registry practices other than pricing that chilled brand owner participation in Sunrise?" or something along those lines Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):@Griffin, we need to add open field , "or was it something else"? I do not think that everithyng was only due to registries policies. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):*happend this way Griffin Barnett:Point taken Amr Elsadr:I'm at Starbucks too. :-) Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):additional note about challenging "premium" status - it is written in RA that names reserved according to ICANNs inclusions to contracts (like ICANN reserved lists ) and everything else it solely up to a registry. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):me too Griffin Barnett:Very hard to understand Kathy...just me? Matt Mlsna:cutting out for me as well Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):the sound is better now Jeff Neuman:Kathy - what is the issue with the order? Matt Mlsna:I have to drop now, but would support Griffin's proposed wording for a fourth bullet point on Question 2 Jeff Neuman:i have to drop Amr Elsadr:@Kathy: Could you provide a suggested question to be added to cover the concerns you are raising? Amr Elsadr:Correct. Amr Elsadr:I believe this is the 4th version. Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Amr....to be clear, the left column is directly from the charter, no changes? Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:thanks Amr Elsadr:@Kristine: Yes. The last table was a comparison between the last version and the updated one. Staff were then asked to revise the table to include the original Charter questions, and match them against the most recent refinements/batching. Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Great, thanks. I thought so! Griffin Barnett:I'm not sure "chiling effect" is the right terminology....the question is really getting at whether reserving names that match TMCH-recorded marks circumvents Sunrise when the reserved name is later released after Sunrise Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Do we have supporting information to these allegations? Griffin Barnett:Exactly right Kristine Griffin Barnett:and also risking losing them to a third party when they should have had the opportunity to register them during Sunrise Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):are we still on Q2 or on Q3? Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:new Q3 Griffin Barnett:Maxim, that's a fair enough point, but we might be getting ahead of ourselves. Seems like you are starting to respond to the Q, while we are still working to finalize the Q wording. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):it is not APLs it is the single ALP .MADRID Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Agree with Maxim about the fact that putting some brands on a reserved list for registry operator reasons/plans is not always bad. I think a good WG discussion will include this. Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Agree with Mary...it's about the effect. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):all other GEOs decided to to risk Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):ith ALPs Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):police is a real example Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Griffin used a good word: circumvent. Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:.MADRID reserving POLICE for the actual police is not circumventing in my world. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):and according to local law they have this name Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):it is not about premium - it is about reserved Griffin Barnett:No one is disagreeing that there may not be legitimate reasons for reserving certain names such that they are unavailable during Sunrise, but that's a discussion we can have at the appropriate time. Griffin Barnett:Sorry that was a lot of double negatives Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:+1 Griffin Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):since reserved names + release+ QLPs are quite tied, these needs to be discussed together, to avoid destruction of current GEO model. Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Agree Maxim, that is one consideration. But the majority of TLDs are NOT Geos Griffin Barnett:Agree it may make sense to bundle any questions relating to reserved names, premium names, pricing, and ALP/QLP together, as they are inter-related Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:So we need examples from both Geos and Non-Geos Griffin Barnett:Agree Kristine. And we might ultimately decide to carve out Geos from any recommendations, or otherwise make recommendations that treat Geos differently than other TLD types Griffin Barnett:But again, getting ahead of ourselves Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):GEOs represent quite big number of real people Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Completely agree...we just need to remember that there are a lot of models Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I don't think brand owners think all the models are problematic. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):ROs are prohibited from TMCH access Griffin Barnett:Ok agian, that's a fine point, but that's getting into substantive responses to the Question. Can we try and stay focused on agreeing to the wording of the Question itself? Kathty:Back to the "chilling effect" of questions 2 and 3. Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Question 4 is a solution - if Question 3 is a problem. Kathty:I think this will introduce a range of questions, definitional issues, etc. Kathty:any objection to rewording?? Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I like Q6 moved to the top of the list.... at this point. Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Q5 is also a solution to Q3, if there is indeed a problem Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):I still do not understand how ROs will access TMCH with current prohibition of access to it Griffin Barnett:It's a good point Kristine - reworded Q6 seems like it should be Q1 doesn't it Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Maxim, the group may decide to make the TMCH public stilll.... if not, then the WG will need to say "sorry, no can do." Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):agree Griffin Barnett:Don't ROs have access, just limited to the specific purposes of facilitating TM Claims and SUnrise? Might need to go back and review the RA/TMCH T&C Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):then we need to add a note that since Registries do not have access to TMCH - then it is not simple Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):RO's are prohibited from access ... we had issues with simple "ping" of TMCH (to understand if it works or not at all) Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Maxim, it's our job as ROs to remind the group of that when we get there. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):ok Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):but adding notice will not allow us to forget about it Amr Elsadr:@Kathy: That corresponds to the original Charter question 13 in the column on the far left. Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Kathy, the point was to make the reworded questions more general...too specific points to suggesting the solution Kathty:Can you circulate the current version and the last version? Mary and Amr? Kathty:That will be helpful, tx. Kathty:To the Notes, please add concern about phrasing, wording, need for balance, and consideration of TM owners, registries and registrants in the questions. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):bye all Griffin Barnett:Thank you Mary, all....bye Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:great job pinch-hitting, Mary! Amr Elsadr:Thanks all. Bye.

1 0

Re: [Gnso-rpm-sunrise] [Ext] Re: FOR REVIEW/DISCUSSION: Updated Google Doc on Sunrise Charter questions
by Mary Wong May 19, 2017

May 19, 2017

Hi Maxim and all – unfortunately, displaying a document in PDF means the comments in the Google Doc aren’t visible. I’ll keep tabs on the Sub Team’s discussion during the call and will be sure to raise it when we reach any point where there has been a comment added to the Google Doc. I hope that works, thanks! Cheers Mary From: Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba(a)gmail.com> Date: Friday, May 19, 2017 at 14:15 To: Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org> Cc: "gnso-rpm-sunrise(a)icann.org" <gnso-rpm-sunrise(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [Gnso-rpm-sunrise] FOR REVIEW/DISCUSSION: Updated Google Doc on Sunrise Charter questions Hello Mary, I provided my comments, please include it into the document we discuss today (last time they were not visible). Sincerely Yours, Maxim Alzoba Special projects manager, International Relations Department, FAITID m. +7 916 6761580(+whatsapp) skype oldfrogger Current UTC offset: +3.00 (.Moscow) On May 18, 2017, at 02:04, Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Sub Team members, With apologies for the slight delay in getting this to you, please note that staff has now updated the Google Doc we used on the last call in accordance with what we understood our instructions to be. As such, you should find – in the third column from the left titled “Proposed Final Updates/Refinements made by the Sub Team” – a list of 12 Sunrise-related questions in total that the Sub Team is intending to recommend be reviewed by the full Working Group:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1w1eAYmIBOZbhHRpN4mCVKgp97ycoadlxv…<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…>. Please review the document, especially the above-mentioned third column, in preparation for the next Sub Team call this Friday where we will try to complete discussions on any additional data gathering that may be needed for those questions that have not yet been associated with a possible data gathering effort, as well as confirm the estimated time allocations for Working Group review of these proposed final questions. In addition, please also remember that there is another action item for this Sub Team; i.e. to discuss/develop definitions on premium names, reserved names, premium Sunrise pricing on mailing list. Please therefore send any thoughts or comments on this topic to this mailing list as well. Thanks and cheers Amr and Mary From: <gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Amr Elsadr <amr.elsadr(a)icann.org<mailto:amr.elsadr@icann.org>> Date: Friday, May 12, 2017 at 22:33 To: "gnso-rpm-sunrise(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-sunrise(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise@icann.org>> Subject: [Gnso-rpm-sunrise] Action Items from Sunrise Registrations Sub Team Call on Friday, 12 May 2017 Dear Sub Team Members, Below are the action items from today’s Sub Team call. The action items, notes, recordings, transcripts and documents/materials for today’s call are all posted on today’s meeting wiki page here: https://community.icann.org/x/Ow3fAw[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_…> Action Items: 1. Changes to the table in the Google Doc a. Staff to repurpose the Comments/Discussion column - populate it with contextual information already gathered to provide reference on changes made to the Charter questions, enabling a clear and comprehensive explanation of Sub Team deliverable to the broader Working Group (including the original Charter question 16) b. Staff to insert previous notes already collected in the column for data collection c. Staff to merge updated question 12 with updated question 11, and incorporate new wording provided by Susan Payne - to be reviewed by the Sub Team, then flagged to the broader Working Group for further follow-up 2. Staff and Sub Team to follow up on pending actions items from previous week: a. Staff to find and circulate earlier answers to the SMD issue provided by Deloitte (in CPH and previously in writing) b. Sub Team to discuss/develop definitions on premium names, reserved names, premium Sunrise pricing on mailing list c. Staff to match and integrate original and reworded questions with data and timeline discussion d. Coordinate discussion on Reserved Names with SubPro (esp WT2) - action for meeting between WG, Sub Team and Work Track chairs (and liaisons) Thanks. Amr _______________________________________________ Gnso-rpm-sunrise mailing list Gnso-rpm-sunrise(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-rpm-sunrise@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-sunrise

1 0

FOR REVIEW/DISCUSSION: Updated Google Doc on Sunrise Charter questions
by Mary Wong May 17, 2017

May 17, 2017

Dear Sub Team members, With apologies for the slight delay in getting this to you, please note that staff has now updated the Google Doc we used on the last call in accordance with what we understood our instructions to be. As such, you should find – in the third column from the left titled “Proposed Final Updates/Refinements made by the Sub Team” – a list of 12 Sunrise-related questions in total that the Sub Team is intending to recommend be reviewed by the full Working Group: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1w1eAYmIBOZbhHRpN4mCVKgp97ycoadlxvE6Joa9…. Please review the document, especially the above-mentioned third column, in preparation for the next Sub Team call this Friday where we will try to complete discussions on any additional data gathering that may be needed for those questions that have not yet been associated with a possible data gathering effort, as well as confirm the estimated time allocations for Working Group review of these proposed final questions. In addition, please also remember that there is another action item for this Sub Team; i.e. to discuss/develop definitions on premium names, reserved names, premium Sunrise pricing on mailing list. Please therefore send any thoughts or comments on this topic to this mailing list as well. Thanks and cheers Amr and Mary From: <gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Amr Elsadr <amr.elsadr(a)icann.org> Date: Friday, May 12, 2017 at 22:33 To: "gnso-rpm-sunrise(a)icann.org" <gnso-rpm-sunrise(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-rpm-sunrise] Action Items from Sunrise Registrations Sub Team Call on Friday, 12 May 2017 Dear Sub Team Members, Below are the action items from today’s Sub Team call. The action items, notes, recordings, transcripts and documents/materials for today’s call are all posted on today’s meeting wiki page here: https://community.icann.org/x/Ow3fAw[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_…> Action Items: 1. Changes to the table in the Google Doc a. Staff to repurpose the Comments/Discussion column - populate it with contextual information already gathered to provide reference on changes made to the Charter questions, enabling a clear and comprehensive explanation of Sub Team deliverable to the broader Working Group (including the original Charter question 16) b. Staff to insert previous notes already collected in the column for data collection c. Staff to merge updated question 12 with updated question 11, and incorporate new wording provided by Susan Payne - to be reviewed by the Sub Team, then flagged to the broader Working Group for further follow-up 2. Staff and Sub Team to follow up on pending actions items from previous week: a. Staff to find and circulate earlier answers to the SMD issue provided by Deloitte (in CPH and previously in writing) b. Sub Team to discuss/develop definitions on premium names, reserved names, premium Sunrise pricing on mailing list c. Staff to match and integrate original and reworded questions with data and timeline discussion d. Coordinate discussion on Reserved Names with SubPro (esp WT2) - action for meeting between WG, Sub Team and Work Track chairs (and liaisons) Thanks. Amr

1 0

REMINDER: Definitions for premium names, reserved names, premium pricing ... ?
by Mary Wong May 16, 2017

May 16, 2017

Dear Sub Team members, As you may recall, it was agreed that the Sub Team will start a discussion of what, if any, definitions it might want to develop for terms such as “reserved names”, “premium names”, and “premium pricing for Sunrise” – with the aim to make it clear that these cover different matters and to assist the Working Group with its review of the Sunrise RPM. Note that the idea is not to engage in a substantive discussion of the merits/disadvantages of these various items but rather to see if we can come up with an agreed list of definitions. Would someone like to kick us off? ☺ Thanks and cheers Mary

1 0

Follow up on two staff action items from Sunrise Sub Team requests
by Mary Wong May 15, 2017

May 15, 2017

Dear all, We are pleased to provide you with updates on two action items on the staff side from the last two Sub Team calls. The first relates to documented rationale for a Sunrise RPM. As mentioned during the last Sub Team call, we were not able to find specific text in either the IRT or STI final reports that directly addressed this question. However, in a 2005 paper on intellectual property considerations in introducing new gTLDs, WIPO’s Arbitration & Mediation Center had made a few observations that we thought might be possibly helpful, particularly in relation to its examination of how previous gTLD launches had dealt with Sunrise. An extract from that 2005 paper is attached, and includes a link to the full paper for your reference. (FYI you may also be interested to know that the IPC had produced a booklet on “The Perfect Sunrise” in 2008 where you can find a summary of the Sunrise mechanisms adopted by some of the gTLDs launched in the 2004 round (.aero, .asia, .biz, .mobi and .museum): https://archive.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/perfect-sunrise-jun08-en.pdf (from pages 10-26).) The second staff action item was for us to recirculate the information that Deloitte had provided to our Working Group in relation to SMD files and the TMCH: · Here is the question that our TMCH Data Gathering Sub Team asked Deloitte and Deloitte’s answer (in January): “Q: How many SMD files has the TMCH revoked as a result of cancellation or expiration of the underlying trademark(s)? How many TMCH disputes have been brought relating to SMD file validity for trademarks that are cancelled/expired? A: Please note that are numerous reasons why a SMD file is revoked. A SMD file, as requested by the community, contains the trademark information and the contact information. This entails that each change revokes the current SMD file and a new SMD file is generated. In addition, a user can opt out of the sunrise services at any time which revokes the current SMD file as well as the fact that the information of trademark record is no longer accurate. Consequently, we do not keep track of the reasons why a SMD file is revoked as this is technically linked to the different stages and interactions with the Trademark Clearinghouse. Due to this and the mere fact that this was never imposed by the community, the validity of a SMD file is not a reason for dispute with the TMCH.” · In Copenhagen, Deloitte provided an updated report on TMCH numbers where it also explained what a deactivated TMCH record means: “What happens if a trademark record goes to invalid? Does it need the database? So for trademark clearinghouse purposes it was always requested that no data would be deleted. So that's why it … becomes deactivated. So in the event that a client wishes no longer to have anything to do with the clearinghouse those trademark records will indeed become - I mean, will have the deactivated status now.” · This followed from Deloitte’s response to the additional questions it had been sent by our Working Group, noting that when a TM holder informs the TMCH that a mark has been cancelled, the TMCH record becomes deactivated and Sunrise services are cancelled within 24 hours. We hope the above is useful. Thanks and cheers Mary From: <gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Amr Elsadr <amr.elsadr(a)icann.org> Date: Friday, May 12, 2017 at 22:33 To: "gnso-rpm-sunrise(a)icann.org" <gnso-rpm-sunrise(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-rpm-sunrise] Action Items from Sunrise Registrations Sub Team Call on Friday, 12 May 2017 Dear Sub Team Members, Below are the action items from today’s Sub Team call. The action items, notes, recordings, transcripts and documents/materials for today’s call are all posted on today’s meeting wiki page here: https://community.icann.org/x/Ow3fAw[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_…> Action Items: 1. Changes to the table in the Google Doc a. Staff to repurpose the Comments/Discussion column - populate it with contextual information already gathered to provide reference on changes made to the Charter questions, enabling a clear and comprehensive explanation of Sub Team deliverable to the broader Working Group (including the original Charter question 16) b. Staff to insert previous notes already collected in the column for data collection c. Staff to merge updated question 12 with updated question 11, and incorporate new wording provided by Susan Payne - to be reviewed by the Sub Team, then flagged to the broader Working Group for further follow-up 2. Staff and Sub Team to follow up on pending actions items from previous week: a. Staff to find and circulate earlier answers to the SMD issue provided by Deloitte (in CPH and previously in writing) b. Sub Team to discuss/develop definitions on premium names, reserved names, premium Sunrise pricing on mailing list c. Staff to match and integrate original and reworded questions with data and timeline discussion d. Coordinate discussion on Reserved Names with SubPro (esp WT2) - action for meeting between WG, Sub Team and Work Track chairs (and liaisons) Thanks. Amr

1 0

Action Items from Sunrise Registrations Sub Team Call on Friday, 12 May 2017
by Amr Elsadr May 12, 2017

May 12, 2017

Dear Sub Team Members, Below are the action items from today’s Sub Team call. The action items, notes, recordings, transcripts and documents/materials for today’s call are all posted on today’s meeting wiki page here: https://community.icann.org/x/Ow3fAw Action Items: 1. Changes to the table in the Google Doc a. Staff to repurpose the Comments/Discussion column - populate it with contextual information already gathered to provide reference on changes made to the Charter questions, enabling a clear and comprehensive explanation of Sub Team deliverable to the broader Working Group (including the original Charter question 16) b. Staff to insert previous notes already collected in the column for data collection c. Staff to merge updated question 12 with updated question 11, and incorporate new wording provided by Susan Payne - to be reviewed by the Sub Team, then flagged to the broader Working Group for further follow-up 2. Staff and Sub Team to follow up on pending actions items from previous week: a. Staff to find and circulate earlier answers to the SMD issue provided by Deloitte (in CPH and previously in writing) b. Sub Team to discuss/develop definitions on premium names, reserved names, premium Sunrise pricing on mailing list c. Staff to match and integrate original and reworded questions with data and timeline discussion d. Coordinate discussion on Reserved Names with SubPro (esp WT2) - action for meeting between WG, Sub Team and Work Track chairs (and liaisons) Thanks. Amr

1 0