Paul:

 

I think the proponents of the closed database have repeatedly articulated the benefits they see in a closed database. That is the status quo. In order to change the status quo, it is the proponents for an open system that need to articulate (persuasively) an overriding need or benefit for such a change.

 

J. Scott

 

<image001.gif>	J. Scott Evans 408.536.5336 (tel) 345 Park Avenue, Mail Stop W11-544 Director, Associate General Counsel 408.709.6162 (cell) San Jose, CA, 95110, USA Adobe. Make It an Experience. jsevans@adobe.com www.adobe.com

 

 

From: <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Paul Keating <paul@law.es>
Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 12:21 PM
To: Marie Pattullo <marie.pattullo@aim.be>
Cc: "gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org>, Michael Karanicolas <michael@law-democracy.org>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] FOR INFORMATION: Letter from trademark scholars and information on Deloitte Ancillary Services

 

Question.

 

solutions for the issues and concerns that have been

mitigated by having the database be closed

 

Can someone please list the issues and concerns at issue here?

 

And, how has closing the database mitigated any of them?

Sent from my iPad

On 28 Mar 2017, at 21:07, Marie Pattullo <marie.pattullo@aim.be> wrote:

solutions for the issues and concerns that have been

mitigated by having the database be closed