February 2019 - GNSO-RPM-WG

RPM PDP WG Trademark Claims Sub Team Status Report 13 February 2019
by Julie Hedlund Feb. 13, 2019

Feb. 13, 2019

Dear members of the RPM PDP WG: On behalf of Martin Silva and Roger Carney, Co-Chairs of the TM Claims Sub Team, please see below the weekly progress report to the full RPM PDP WG. Roger acted as chair during the call<https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/2019-02-13+Sub+team+for+Tr…> on Wednesday, 13 February. Current Status: The Sub Team continued analysis of the previously collected data in order to determine whether any of the data may assist in answering the agreed Charter questions. See the Charter questions on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/Documents%2C+drafts%2C+res…. As of the meeting on 13 February the Sub Team continued the discussion of the analysis of the previously collected data, with a view toward answering the agreed Charter questions. In particular, it discussed the Analysis Group Independent Review of TMCH Services and AG’s responses with respect to TM Claims Charter Questions 1-5. At the meeting on 20 February, the Sub Team will discuss the INTA New gTLD Impact Study Survey Result with respect to TM Claims Charter Questions 1-5 in order to determine whether any of the data may assist in answering each of the agreed Charter questions. Per the timeline in the Proposed Process for TMCH Sunrise & Trademark Claims Sub Teams, the goal is for the Sub Team to complete the analysis of previously collected data by the meeting on 27 February. The Sub Team is expected to provide a progress report on its analysis of previously collected data to the full WG and to turn to the review of preliminary recommendations at ICANN64 in Kobe.

1 0

Updates to RPM PDP WG Timeline & Preliminary Kobe Planning
by Julie Hedlund Feb. 13, 2019

Feb. 13, 2019

Dear RPM PDP WG members, On behalf of the RPM PDP WG Co-Chairs, please see the attached updated timeline from the Proposed Process for TMCH Sunrise & Trademark Claims Sub Teams. The updated document reflects the WG Co-Chairs’ decision after considering the request from the Sunrise and Trademark Claims Sub Team Co-Chairs, on behalf of Sub Team members, to extend the time for the analysis of the previously collected data as it may pertain to the revised agreed Charter questions. In addition, the updated timeline reflects an adjustment to the due date for WG members to submit suggestions for additional data, and to submit individual proposals. Finally, the timeline reflects the WG Co-Chairs suggestion for the WG meeting sessions at ICANN64 in Kobe. The updates are summarized as follows: 1. Extend Sub Team analysis of previously collected data to meetings on 20 and 27 February (to include 13 February). 2. Close of Submission of Additional Data: extended from COB Friday, 08 February to COB Wednesday, 13 February. 3. Close of Submission of Individual Proposals: extended from COB Thursday, 21 February to COB Wednesday, 27 March. 4. Proposed Sessions for ICANN64 in Kobe: * Session 1: Sunday, 10 March, 1515-1645 -- Sunrise Sub Team Meeting * Session 2: Sunday, 10 March, 1700-1830 -- Sunrise Sub Team Meeting * Session 3: Monday, 11 March, 1215-1315 -- TM Claims Sub Team Meeting * Session 4: Monday, 11 March, 1330-1500 -- Full WG Meeting The WG Co-Chairs may make further adjustments to the timeline as may be requested by the Sub Team Co-Chairs to further facilitate the work of the Sub Teams, and as may be requested by WG members. Best regards, Mary, Ariel, and Julie

3 3

[Summary Table] Sunrise & Claims Sub Teams' Deliberation on AG Survey Results
by Ariel Liang Feb. 12, 2019

Feb. 12, 2019

Dear RPM WG Members, In accordance with the proposed process, Staff are sharing the summary table that includes the Sunrise and Trademark Claims sub teams’ deliberation on the Analysis Group survey results. Please find the documents attached. For each of the Sunrise charter question, the following content is included in the second column of the table: 1) a summary of whether/how the AG survey data answers the charter question and its sub question(s); 2) tab/cell reference to survey data in the analysis tool<https://drive.google.com/open?id=1aBw-dW2gBzvBfhUgl3u6ShWlPZt0yyNF-Vs1qmUuI…>, which the sub teams used to review the AG survey results; 3) link to the sub teams’ Google Doc homework, which contains the full analysis by sub team members; and 4) wiki page link(s) to sub team meeting(s) when the charter question was discussed. Thank you for your review. Best Regards, Mary, Julie, Berry, Ariel

1 0

RPM PDP WG Trademark Claims Sub Team Status Report 11 February 2019
by Julie Hedlund Feb. 11, 2019

Feb. 11, 2019

Dear members of the RPM PDP WG, On behalf of Martin Silva and Roger Carney, Co-Chairs of the TM Claims Sub Team, please see below the weekly progress report to the full RPM PDP WG. Martin acted as chair during the call<https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/2019-02-06+Sub+team+for+Tr…> on Wednesday, 06 February. Current Status: The Sub Team has begun analysis of the previously collected data in order to determine whether any of the data may assist in answering the agreed Charter questions. See the Charter questions on the wiki at:https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/Documents%2C+drafts%2C+…. As of the meeting on 06 February the Sub Team continued the discussion of the analysis of the previously collected data, with a view toward answering the agreed Charter questions. In particular, it discussed the first four (4) source documents with respect to TM Claims Charter Questions 1-3. At the meeting on 13 February, the Sub Team will continue discussion of the first four (4) source documents with respect to TM Claims Charter Questions 4 and 5. In addition, it will discuss the Analysis Group Independent Review of TMCH Services and AG’s responses to follow up questions in order to determine whether any of the data may assist in answering each of the agreed Charter questions. Per the revised timeline in the Proposed Process for TMCH Sunrise & Trademark Claims Sub Teams, the goal is for the Sub Team to complete that analysis by the meeting on 27 February. The Sub Team is expected to provide a progress report on analysis of previously collected data to the full WG and to turn to the review of preliminary recommendations at ICANN64 in Kobe.

1 0

RPM PDP WG Sunrise Sub Team Status Report 11 February 2018
by Julie Hedlund Feb. 11, 2019

Feb. 11, 2019

Dear members of the RPM PDP WG: On behalf of Greg Shatan and David McAuley, Co-Chairs of the Sunrise Sub Team, please see below the weekly progress report to the full RPM PDP WG. Greg acted as chair during the call<https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/2019-02-06+Sub+Team+for+Su…> on Wednesday, 06 February. Current Status: The Sub Team has begun analysis of the previously collected data in order to determine whether any of the data may assist in answering the agreed Charter questions. See the Charter questions on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/Documents%2C+Drafts%2C+Res…. As of the meeting on 06 February the Sub Team continued the discussion of the analysis of the previously collected data, with a view toward answering the agreed Charter questions. In particular, it discussed the following source documents with respect to Sunrise Charter Questions 1-4, 5(a) and (b): 1. Registry Operator Responses to Initial Survey from TMCH Data Gathering Sub Team:https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64066042/Registry%20R… 2. Deloitte responses to initial questions from TMCH Data Gathering Sub Team:https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64066042/Deloitte%20r… 3. Deloitte TMCH Report: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170311/e28abe0e/IC… 4. Response to follow up questions - Apr 2017: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170414/4591dc7c/De… At the meeting on 13 February, the Sub Team will continue discussion of four (4) source documents listed above with respect to TM Claims Charter Questions 6-12. In addition, it will discuss the following source documents in order to determine whether any of the data may assist in answering each of the agreed Charter questions. 1. Analysis Group Independent Review of TMCH Services: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64066042/Analysis%20Group%… 2. AG Response to follow up questions - June 2017: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2017-June/002043.html 3. AG Response to follow up questions - July 2017: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170727/06a0c33e/Re… Per the revised timeline in the Proposed Process for TMCH Sunrise & Trademark Claims Sub Teams, the goal is for the Sub Team to complete that analysis by the meeting on 27 February. The Sub Team is expected to provide a progress report on analysis of previously collected data to the full WG and to turn to the review of preliminary recommendations at ICANN64 in Kobe.

1 0

George Kirikos Section 3.7 appeal in RPM PDP working group
by George Kirikos Feb. 11, 2019

Feb. 11, 2019

Hi folks, As previously discussed, attached is the Section 3.7 appeal brought under the working group guidelines. As mentioned on the sub teams list, this is meant to be constructive, to to obstruct our work, but to call to the attention of "the powers that be" the realities on the ground that they appear to not be aware of or are ignoring. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/

4 10

RPM PDP WG Sunrise Sub Team Status Report 04 February 2018
by Julie Hedlund Feb. 4, 2019

Feb. 4, 2019

Dear members of the RPM PDP WG: On behalf of Greg Shatan and David McAuley, Co-Chairs of the Sunrise Sub Team, please see below the weekly progress report to the full RPM PDP WG. David acted as chair during the call on Wednesday, 30 January. Current Status: The Sub Team has completed its analysis of the results of the Sunrise survey with a view toward answering the agreed questions (which are also based on refinements of the original Charter questions for this RPM). The Sub Team has begun analysis of the previously collected data in order to determine whether any of the data may assist in answering the agreed Charter questions. As of the meeting on 30 January the Sub Team briefly discussed further comments on the additional input on Charter Questions 3 and 4, and touched on Charter Questions 5(b) and 6 with respect to the Sunrise survey data. In addition, it began analysis of the previously collected data, with a view toward answering the agreed Charter questions. In particular, it began a discussion of the following data sources with respect to the Preamble Sunrise Charter Question, as well as Questions 1 and 2: Registry Operator Responses to Initial Survey from TMCH Data Gathering Sub Team: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64066042/Registry%20Respon… Deloitte responses to initial questions from TMCH Data Gathering Sub Team: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64066042/Deloitte%20respon… At the meeting on 06 February, the Sub Team will discuss the following data sources in order to determine whether any of the data may assist in answering the agreed Charter questions. Registry Operator Responses to Initial Survey from TMCH Data Gathering Sub Team: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64066042/Registry%20Respon… Deloitte responses to initial questions from TMCH Data Gathering Sub Team: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64066042/Deloitte%20respon… Deloitte TMCH Report: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170311/e28abe0e/IC… Response to follow up questions - Apr 2017: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170414/4591dc7c/De… Per the timeline in the Proposed Process for TMCH Sunrise & Trademark Claims Sub Teams, the goal is for the Sub Team to complete that analysis by the meeting on 13 February. The Sub Team is expected to provide a progress report on preliminary recommendations to the full WG meeting during the week of 27 February, and to turn to the review of preliminary recommendations and individual proposals at ICANN64 in Kobe.

1 0

RPM PDP WG Trademark Claims Sub Team Status Report 01 February 2019
by Julie Hedlund Feb. 1, 2019

Feb. 1, 2019

Dear members of the RPM PDP WG: On behalf of Martin Silva and Roger Carney, Co-Chairs of the TM Claims Sub Team, please see below the weekly progress report to the full RPM PDP WG. Martin acted as chair during the call on Wednesday, 30 January. Current Status: The Sub Team has completed its analysis of the results of the TM Claims survey with a view toward answering the agreed questions (which are also based on refinements of the original Charter questions for this RPM). See the Charter questions on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/Documents%2C+drafts%2C+res…. The Sub Team has begun analysis of the previously collected data in order to determine whether any of the data may assist in answering the agreed Charter questions. As of the meeting on 30 January the Sub Team began the discussion of the analysis of the previously collected data, with a view toward answering the agreed Charter questions. In particular, it discussed the first two data sources with respect to TM Claims Charter Questions 1 and 2. At the meeting on 06 February, the Sub Team will discuss the first four data sources in order to determine whether any of the data may assist in answering the agreed Charter questions. Per the timeline in the Proposed Process for TMCH Sunrise & Trademark Claims Sub Teams, the goal is for the Sub Team to complete that analysis by the meeting on 13 February. However, the Sub Team has asked the Co-Chairs to evaluate whether additional time will be needed. The Sub Team is expected to provide a progress report on preliminary recommendations to the full WG meeting during the week of 27 February, and to turn to the review of preliminary recommendations and individual proposals at ICANN64 in Kobe.

1 0

Updated Proposed Process for TMCH Sunrise & Trademark Claims Sub Teams Including Submission of Additional Data
by Kathy Kleiman Feb. 1, 2019

Feb. 1, 2019

Dear RPM WG members, The WG Co-Chairs have considered the requests concerning additional data and the observation that additional specific information may assist the WG’s efforts. Note however that our agreed work process does not allow for an extensive research exercise, and we believe we have already been presented with the vast majority of such information and sources over the past 2 years -- so this is something of a “last call” for data. (Nor do we have the staff resources to conduct such an exercise.) In this light, WG members may suggest additional data to the Sunrise and Claims Sub Teams that may either: (1) yield specific useful data we do not currently have and/or or (2) assist Sunrise and/or Claims Sub Teams. Examples of additional data: * articles about the registration of domains in Sunrise Periods (or attempts) that appear to have had an impact on contracted parties, registrants, or brand owners; * anecdotes or specific evidence from impacted parties; or * studies, reports, or articles discussing the harm of infringement including cybersquatting (including consumer harm). To assist in this process and try to stay within our current timeline, we have added some brief procedures in section 5 of the attached document. Note that this an updated version of the procedure document previously provided by staff to the WG with the following changes: * Deleted 30 January full WG meeting (Subteams continue to meet); * Updated submission for individual proposals to start 30 January and end 20 February; * Incorporated process for submission of additional data and included submission dates in the timeline – to start *28 January and end 08 February*; * Included discussion of additional data by the Sub Teams on 13 February; and * Updated the ICANN64 Kobe meeting description to include full WG meetings and the option for Sub Team meetings. As noted in the attached revised procedures, although additional data of various kinds may be submitted, we are asking WG members to use the designated Google Form (https://goo.gl/forms/84YtaNDH2Mx3SQVH3 [goo.gl] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__goo.gl_forms_84YtaNDH2…>) to ensure that any additional data a member wishes to provide should: * highlight what specific information (i.e., new data or evidence-based conclusion) it is being cited for; * include a rationale for why and how that specific information is relevant and in respect of which particular question; and * suggest a solution and/or idea for how to address the topic. If you have issue accessing the online form, please contact ariel.liang(a)icann.org <mailto:ariel.liang@icann.org> to request assistance. A .doc version of form will be provided upon request. Upon the close of the submission window, Sub Teams will review any additional data to determine whether it is useful in advancing the WG’s efforts. Brian Beckham, Phil Corwin, Kathy Kleiman, RPM PDP WG Co-Chairs

5 11