October 2016 - Gnso-rpm-tmch

Updated/amended list of questions to Registries, Registrars and the TMCH Providers
by Mary Wong Oct. 18, 2016

Oct. 18, 2016

Dear all, Staff has updated the above-mentioned list of questions based on the Sub Team call of Friday 14 October. We will be very grateful if you can let us know of any inaccuracies or omissions as soon as possible. As agreed by the Sub Team, staff will send the list of proposed questions to the registrars to Greg Rafert of the Analysis Group, for feedback on any overlaps and similarities with what the Analysis Group is seeking data for (as well as enquire as to whether and when we might hope to see the Analysis Group’s findings on the new registrar data). For the registries and provider questions, we will aim to send those out before the week is out, unless anyone has any further corrections. Finally, please note that we are aiming to have a draft report from this Sub Team out to you for your review within the next day or two. Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org Telephone: +1-603-5744889 From: David Tait <david.tait(a)icann.org> Date: Friday, October 14, 2016 at 12:38 To: "gnso-rpm-tmch(a)icann.org" <gnso-rpm-tmch(a)icann.org> Cc: Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org> Subject: Notes and Actions from RPMs TMCH sub-team call 14 Oct 2016 Dear All Please find below the notes and actions from today’s RPMs TMCH sub-team call. 1. The meeting began with a review of the questions being sent by the Analysis group to the TMCH providers. An additional question suggested: What is the "base-line" abandonment rate? 2. A review of the feedback from received from Registrars to the sub-team’s questions took place. The following amendments were suggested: Q1 stop at "displayed". Q2 - 4 remove term "cart" and revise to "what is the rate of attempted registration abandonment" Q Re: TM+50, add general question at the end and remove specific question The following actions we agreed: · Staff to share questions with Analysis Group · Staff to review transcript for proposed revisions to questions to registrars. · Consider geting TMCH data on their clients registering in new gTLDs (to factor into possibility that a TM owner may be buying their own name, and getting a claims notice - Susan P to check if TMCH clients buying their own name get a notice at all, or if that depends on which registrar they use) · Add question for Providers re: Compare reg TMCH entries vs. the TMCH +50 designations · Staff to review registrar questions regarding TM+50 to fold in conclusion of discussions · ST to provide further suggestions on sunrise questions. Add 'or if you have no data please [insert SB proposed redraft] Kind regards, David A. Tait Policy Specialist (Solicitor qualified in Scotland) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: + 44-7864-793776 Email: david.tait(a)icann.org www.icann.org

1 0

TMCH Sub team report outline
by Susan Payne Oct. 17, 2016

Oct. 17, 2016

Hi David I put in the chat that I was happy with the outline below, but thought I’d repeat on the list too. Regarding · Proposed further data gathering from key-stakeholders. Am I right in understanding this to refer to a summary of the information we are seeking from the various parties in the questions we are sending out – it’s not a reference to future data gathering? Susan Susan Payne Head of Legal Policy | Valideus Ltd E: susan.payne(a)valideus.com<mailto:susan.payne@valideus.com> D: +44 20 7421 8255 T: +44 20 7421 8299 M: +44 7971 661175 From: gnso-rpm-tmch-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-tmch-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of David Tait Sent: 10 October 2016 19:31 To: gnso-rpm-tmch(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-tmch] TMCH Sub team meeting Friday, 7 October 2016 Dear Sub-team members Further to my previous email (below), just a reminder that while the call did not progress on Friday, staff are still seeking input on the proposed outline of the report to the WG group on the sub-team’s activities. We would therefore be grateful for any comments you had in advance of the next sub-team call, scheduled to take place Friday, 14 October 2016 at 15:00 UTC for 60 minutes. Any comments would be gratefully received. Kind regards, David From: <gnso-rpm-tmch-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-tmch-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of David Tait <david.tait(a)icann.org<mailto:david.tait@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, 5 October 2016 at 11:26 To: "gnso-rpm-tmch(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-tmch@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-tmch(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-tmch@icann.org>> Subject: [Gnso-rpm-tmch] TMCH Sub team meeting Friday, 7 October 2016 Dear Sub-team members Just a brief reminder that at our last meeting a final draft of questions related to the TMCH was prepared. Should you have any final comments on these we would be grateful to receive them asap. In relation to the meeting for this week, scheduled for Friday, 7 October 2016 at 15:00 UTC, staff would suggest that this would provide an opportune time to discuss the report to be sent to the Working Group. Tentatively we would suggest that the report could cover the following items: · Overview of activities to date; · Publicly available data obtained by the ST (i.e. the tabular summary prepared by staff); · Outcome of meetings with analysis group; and · Proposed further data gathering from key-stakeholders. We would be grateful to receive any comments you had on this outline. Kind regards, David David A. Tait Policy Specialist (Solicitor qualified in Scotland) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: + 44-7864-793776 Email: david.tait(a)icann.org<mailto:david.tait@icann.org> www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

2 1

Mp3, Attendance & AC Chat for RPM TMCH Sub Team
by Michelle DeSmyter Oct. 14, 2016

Oct. 14, 2016

Dear All, Please find the attendance, MP3 recording and Adobe Connect chat below for the Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) TMCH Sub Team call held on Friday, 14 October 2016 at 15:00 UTC. MP3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-rpm-tmch-14oct16-en.mp3 <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-rpm-tmch-16sep16-en.mp3> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the Sub Team wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/_Rm4Aw Attendees: Kathy Kleiman Khouloud Dawahi Kristine Dorrain Kurt Pritz Marina Lewis Philip Corwin Sarah Clayton Susan Payne Apologies: ICANN staff: Mary Wong Antonietta Mangiacotti David Tait Berry Cobb Michelle DeSmyter ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-tmch/ Sub Team Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/_Rm4Aw Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle DeSmyter ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for 14 October 2016: Michelle DeSmyter:Dear All, Welcome to the Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) - TMCH Sub Team Meeting on Friday, 14 October 2016 at 15:00 UTC. Susan Payne:hi all Mary Wong:Hello! Mary Wong:@Susan, we have a copy of your questions and email from this morning as well - we can upload that too Philip Corwin:Apologies for late arrival/computer issues Mary Wong:Me Mary Wong:We're told the Analysis Group questions will go out next week Mary Wong:And will have a mid-Nov deadline David Tait:I told him questions are going out next week David Tait:yeah Mary Wong:So the timing is very close - just about the same - as ours David Tait:Was that correct? David Tait:Thats the first set of questions up now Mary Wong:@Kurt, that's very helpful Susan Payne:fine Philip Corwin:Agree that getting base abandonment rate for registrations of non-TMCH domains would be useful data to measure meaning of the 94% rate David Tait:document uploaded now Susan Payne:sounds fine Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Agree with Q1 change. Susan Payne:yes to kurt Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:I was agreeing! Berry Cobb:As I have encountered, you add the name to the cart, and in the payment process is when you are presented with the notice. Upon successful acknowledgement of the notice, then you complete the registration process by completing the payment. Philip Corwin:It's really abandonment of a specific requested domain name, but perhaps not the entire cart -- there may be other names in the cart that go through to completion even if one is deleted after receipt of the claims notice Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Agree, Phil, maybe that's really what GoDaddy meant as well. Kathy K:Hi All, Apologies for joining late. Susan Payne:agree, plus the rate at which they didn't proceed during the claims but for names not subject to a claims notice. Susan Payne:no Kurt Pritz:i m ight have to rejoin Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Yes, Susan, this is a piece of the puzzle Kurt Pritz:mic not working Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Can't hear Kurt Kurt Pritz:dont wait! Kathy K:Tx Mary! David Tait:all good Sarah:surely results will be skewed by rights owners (TMCH clients) buying their own name, receiving a notice, and continuing with registration? Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Yes, I think that's definitely going to be a factor... David Tait:ye David Tait:*yes Susan Payne:ah, ok. I will check David Tait:Kurt it should be free to scroll Kathy K:If the TMCH keeps track of the number of TM Owner domain name registrations, that seems like a number to collect from the TMCH and subtract from the data we received from the registrars. Kathy K:@Kurt, if she does not understand TM+50, shouldn't we explain it? Susan Payne:yes that makes sense Susan Payne:to kurt's comment Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:@Kathy, do you think it would be confusing? The registrar doesn't really know how a string gets on the TMCH list. Mary Wong:Yes, that is the problem, I think, Kristine Susan Payne:I don't this it's necessarily a problem - suspect Sarah Bickey is not the person at GD who deals with registrants Susan Payne:Bockey Berry Cobb:They won't be able to distinguish from a Regular TMCH entry vs. one that was allowed into the TMCH due to the +50 rule. Mary Wong:That's what I was saying, thanks Berry Philip Corwin:Agree that registrar may not know whether a name that generates a claims notice is a trademark or a TM+50 term Berry Cobb:+1 Kristine Berry Cobb:And the notice itself (what is presented to potential Rt) is the same regardless. Mary Wong:Yes Berry Cobb:I'd say the best source will be for IBM/Deloitte to compare reg TMCH entries vs. the TMCH +50 designations, but they would need hyper-active registration details from Registrars, which may be difficult and likely not retained for very long. Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Agree that the catch-all could help. Agree to see what the TMCH might know. Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:does the TMCH track registrations, either TM+50 or otherwise? I didn't think so.... Kathy K:@Mary and David, could you take a fast look and let us know the current TM+50 Question to Providers? Kristine Dorrain - Amazon Registry Services:Oooh, that would be good then, thanks Kurt! Kathy K:@David: did any Registrars answer that they could answer the TM+50 question? Mary Wong:@Kathy, no Susan Payne:Very happy with the framework Kathy K:sounds good Kurt Pritz:thanks Kathy K:tx! Philip Corwin:bye all Susan Payne:thanks

1 0

TMCH Sub Team meeting on Friday 14 October
by Mary Wong Oct. 14, 2016

Oct. 14, 2016

Dear all, Just resending David’s note from 5 October, outlining what staff suggests may be a useful framework for this Sub Team’s report back to the full Working Group (please see the bullet points below). Following the Sub Team’s discussion and, hopefully, sign off on the call tomorrow, staff will prepare a draft report for finalization by the Sub Team prior to forwarding it to the full Working Group. Regarding the various agreed questions to Registrars, Registries and the TMCH Providers, please note the following updates: · We have just learned from our GDD colleagues that the Analysis Group plans to ask for further data from both Registries and Registrars. From what we are told, their request to the Registries (of New gTLDs) will concern only wholesale pricing, so that should not overlap with anything that our Sub Team is planning to ask from these Registries. · For Registrars, however, the Analysis Group plans to ask for data that can shed more light on cart abandonment rate. As this was a substantial point of discussion for our Sub Team and also the full Working Group, we may wish to either hold off on sending the questions that Kathy and Kurt are working to finalize, or coordinate with the Analysis Group to avoid repeating the same question while getting the data that we need. We can discuss this further on the call tomorrow, but David and I thought it best to let you know ahead of time. Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org Telephone: +1-603-5744889 From: <gnso-rpm-tmch-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of David Tait <david.tait(a)icann.org> Date: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 at 06:26 To: "gnso-rpm-tmch(a)icann.org" <gnso-rpm-tmch(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-rpm-tmch] TMCH Sub team meeting Friday, 7 October 2016 Dear Sub-team members Just a brief reminder that at our last meeting a final draft of questions related to the TMCH was prepared. Should you have any final comments on these we would be grateful to receive them asap. In relation to the meeting for this week, scheduled for Friday, 7 October 2016 at 15:00 UTC, staff would suggest that this would provide an opportune time to discuss the report to be sent to the Working Group. Tentatively we would suggest that the report could cover the following items: · Overview of activities to date; · Publicly available data obtained by the ST (i.e. the tabular summary prepared by staff); · Outcome of meetings with analysis group; and · Proposed further data gathering from key-stakeholders. We would be grateful to receive any comments you had on this outline. Kind regards, David David A. Tait Policy Specialist (Solicitor qualified in Scotland) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: + 44-7864-793776 Email: david.tait(a)icann.org www.icann.org

5 7

Notes and Actions from RPMs TMCH sub-team call 14 Oct 2016
by David Tait Oct. 14, 2016

Oct. 14, 2016

Dear All Please find below the notes and actions from today’s RPMs TMCH sub-team call. 1. The meeting began with a review of the questions being sent by the Analysis group to the TMCH providers. An additional question suggested: What is the "base-line" abandonment rate? 2. A review of the feedback from received from Registrars to the sub-team’s questions took place. The following amendments were suggested: Q1 stop at "displayed". Q2 - 4 remove term "cart" and revise to "what is the rate of attempted registration abandonment" Q Re: TM+50, add general question at the end and remove specific question The following actions we agreed: · Staff to share questions with Analysis Group · Staff to review transcript for proposed revisions to questions to registrars. · Consider geting TMCH data on their clients registering in new gTLDs (to factor into possibility that a TM owner may be buying their own name, and getting a claims notice - Susan P to check if TMCH clients buying their own name get a notice at all, or if that depends on which registrar they use) · Add question for Providers re: Compare reg TMCH entries vs. the TMCH +50 designations · Staff to review registrar questions regarding TM+50 to fold in conclusion of discussions · ST to provide further suggestions on sunrise questions. Add 'or if you have no data please [insert SB proposed redraft] Kind regards, David A. Tait Policy Specialist (Solicitor qualified in Scotland) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: + 44-7864-793776 Email: david.tait(a)icann.org www.icann.org

1 0

TMCH Sub team meeting Friday, 7 October 2016
by David Tait Oct. 10, 2016

Oct. 10, 2016

Dear Sub-team members Just a brief reminder that at our last meeting a final draft of questions related to the TMCH was prepared. Should you have any final comments on these we would be grateful to receive them asap. In relation to the meeting for this week, scheduled for Friday, 7 October 2016 at 15:00 UTC, staff would suggest that this would provide an opportune time to discuss the report to be sent to the Working Group. Tentatively we would suggest that the report could cover the following items: · Overview of activities to date; · Publicly available data obtained by the ST (i.e. the tabular summary prepared by staff); · Outcome of meetings with analysis group; and · Proposed further data gathering from key-stakeholders. We would be grateful to receive any comments you had on this outline. Kind regards, David David A. Tait Policy Specialist (Solicitor qualified in Scotland) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: + 44-7864-793776 Email: david.tait(a)icann.org www.icann.org

5 6