Dear All, Please see below the action items and notes captured by staff from the RPM Sunrise Sub Team meeting held on 08 May 2019 (18:00-19:30 UTC). Staff will post them to the wiki space. Please note that these are high-level notes and are not meant as a substitute for the recording, chat room, or transcript. The recording, AC chat, transcript and attendance records are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/2019-05-08+Sub+Team+for+Sun.... Best Regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director == NOTES & ACTION ITEMS Action Items: 1. Sub Team members will review discussion threads on: * Q1 (including Proposal #9): https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-sunrise/2019-April/000278.html * Q3 (including Proposals #10 & #11): https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-sunrise/2019-April/000270.html * Q4: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-sunrise/2019-April/000271.html * Q5(a): https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-sunrise/2019-April/000279.html * Q6: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-sunrise/2019-May/000286.html 2. Question #8: Staff will revise the summary table. Distinguish among the three elements: LRP, ALP, QLP to make sure they are not conflated. 3. Staff will update the summary table based on the transcript/recording from the meeting. Brief Notes: 1. Updates to Statements of Interest (SOIs): No updates provided. 2. Development of Preliminary Recommendations: a. Discuss agreed Sunrise Charter Question 8 -- There were some limited comments in the data, but don’t think they relate to the LRP. Some issues around launch programs generally. -- Limited uptake of ALP. -- People need to be clear what they are talking about. Make sure this is clear in the discussion thread. -- The responses said that some registries noted issues with the improved launch program, which is completely different. -- Staff will revise the summary table by reviewing the source material. b. Discuss agreed Sunrise Charter Question 9, in conjunction with Proposal #13 -- Support for keeping the current rules. -- Let mark holders decide where to register the mark in Sunrise. -- Anecdote suggest problems -- scenarios where people gamed the system. -- Solution penalizes the vast majority of genuine brand owners. -- Don’t develop a system that goes further than it should. -- Not every TLD is category-specific. Proposal #13, Michael Karanicolas: -- Where a top level domain is suggestive of a category of service, then the TM holder would have to prove use in that category of service. -- The proposal doesn’t go far enough. -- Could look at how SDRP could address the problem or some variant.