Dear Sub team members, I am posting these proposals on Charter Question 4 (reserved names) in response to our recent Sub team discussion on this topic. Any questions or comments are most welcome. Thanks! Best regards, Claudio *Proposal 1* 1) If the Registry Operator chooses to reserve any names from registration that are not required to be reserved under the Registry's agreement with ICANN, then the Registry operator MUST create a "Reserved Names List" prior to the commencement of its Sunrise Period, which includes any such labels reserved by the Registry. (2) Registry Operator MUST send its Reserved Names List to the TMCH Operator prior to the commencement of its Sunrise Period. (3) TMCH Operator MUST identify if any reserved names on the Reserved Names List match existing Trademark Records in the TMCH; (4) If any reserved names on the Reserved Names List match existing TMCH Trademark Records, then the TMCH Operator MUST send a notification of the match ("Reserved Name Match") to the trademark owner of record (and/or their representative) as listed in the TMCH. *Summary*: This process (1) restricts disclosure of reserved names and TMCH records to the TMCH operator and the trademark owner and/or their agent; and (2) provides transparency on the status of trademark-matching reserved labels, which have been reserved from registration. ------ *Proposal 2* (1) If Registry Operator chooses to unreserve a label on their Reserved Names List after its Sunrise Period is over; (2) Then Registry Operator MUST notify the TMCH that those labels have been unreserved; (3) If the unreserved label matches an existing trademark record in the TMCH, then the TMCH Operator MUST notify the trademark owner (and/or their representative) as listed in the TMCH, that the trademark-matching label has been un-reserved. *Summary*: This proposal provides notice to the trademark owner that their trademark-matching reserved label (that was previously reserved before Sunrise) has been un-reserved by the Registry after Sunrise, and before the string is potentially registered by a third-party. On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 11:48 AM Ariel Liang <ariel.liang@icann.org> wrote:

Dear Sunrise Sub Team members,

As announced, this thread is being opened for final mailing list discussions related to *Sunrise Agreed Charter Question 4*.

We ask that you review the *Summary Table* *(as of 16 April 2019) *and provide any additional input you may have to the “*tentative answers & preliminary recommendations*” in relation to the Agreed Charter Question.

Unless the Sub Team Co-Chairs determine otherwise, this discussion thread will remain open until *23:59 UTC on 15 May 2019*. Comments/input provided past the closing date or outside this discussion thread will not be taken into account when compiling the final Sub Team member input.

*Summary Table (Pages 20-24)*

The draft answers, preliminary recommendations, and links to the relevant individual proposals are in the latest Summary Table (as of 16 April 2019):

https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102138618/%5BSunrise%20Summ....

*Agreed Sunrise Charter Question 4** (Pages 20-21)*

The Sub Team discussed Agreed Charter Question 4 on 10 April 2019 but did not develop tentative answers or preliminary recommendations, hence the proposed answers are “TBD”. The Sub Team continued the discussion on 17 April 2019. Based on the Sub Team’s discussions, the transcript and notes, staff will provide update via this discussion thread.

*(a) Are Registry Operator Reserved Names practices unfairly limiting participation in Sunrise by trademark owners?*

*Proposed Answer: *TBD

* (b) Should Section 1.3.3 of Specification 1 of the Registry Agreement be modified to address these concerns?*

*Proposed Answer: *TBD

* (c) Should Registry Operators be required to publish their Reserved Names lists -- what Registry concerns would be raised by that publication, and what problem(s) would it solve?*

*Proposed Answer: *TBD

* (d) Should Registry Operators be required to provide trademark owners in the TMCH notice, and the opportunity to register, the domain name should the Registry Operator release it – what Registry concerns would be raised by this requirement?*

*Proposed Answer: *TBD

*Individual Proposal*

As noted by Kristine Dorrain, Individual Proposal #11 is more relevant to Sunrise Q3. Please discuss Individual Proposal #11 in the discussion thread for Sunrise Q3.

Best Regards,

Mary, Julie, Ariel

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rpm-sunrise mailing list Gnso-rpm-sunrise@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-sunrise