To follow up, my favorite GI geek informs me: "The EU relies on registered GI databases which need to be consulted by EUIPO trade mark examiners when assessing applications against absolute grounds. So it's checking for prior registered IP rights in a (GIs) database." Would that count as notification in your proposal? If you don't want it to, what do you suggest? I don't like exclusion of GIs just because they're GIs. But if you don't want GIs but do want "other marks that are neither GIs nor TMs" then there may be no way around it. Or, in the alternative, does the group want "Champagne" to be included in the TMCH where a treaty or national law does list Champagne as a protected GI in the law itself? I myself am closer to agnostic on this but I would like a rule that is intelligible and honest about what we want done. Rebecca Tushnet Frank Stanton Professor of First Amendment Law, Harvard Law School 703 593 6759 ________________________________ From: Paul Tattersfield <gpmgroup@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 2, 2019 9:03 AM To: Tushnet, Rebecca <rtushnet@law.harvard.edu> Cc: Michael Graham (ELCA) <migraham@expediagroup.com>; claudio di gangi <ipcdigangi@gmail.com>; gnso-rpm-wg <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [GNSO-RPM-WG] Proposal re Q8. Perhaps the heavy lifting could be done elsewhere? 3.2.3 Any word mark notified to a national trademark office as protected by a statute or treaty in effect at the time the mark is submitted to the Clearinghouse for inclusion On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 2:14 AM Tushnet, Rebecca <rtushnet@law.harvard.edu<mailto:rtushnet@law.harvard.edu>> wrote: In GI-world, they distinguish between levels of GI-ness. Some geographic terms merely identify the geographic "source" of a product, while others indicate more in the way of specific qualities. So "source indicator" is in fact widely used to describe GIs (though many GIs are said to be source-plus-some-other-quality). Some examples https://www.origin-gi.com/images/stories/PDFs/English/E-Library/geographical_indications.pdf<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.origin-2Dgi.com_images_stories_PDFs_English_E-2DLibrary_geographical-5Findications.pdf&d=DwMFaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=7s8Z71SEOge5sFwz9QH1S2IWHNP9TisJOPm_i4yk5Zc&s=WK20kgaZCGKBQ4B94sPoo-KjPEtqUB-JqZNZnaXbgPo&e=> https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/web/offices/dcom/olia/globalip/pdf/gi_system.pdf<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.uspto.gov_sites_default_files_web_offices_dcom_olia_globalip_pdf_gi-5Fsystem.pdf&d=DwMFaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=7s8Z71SEOge5sFwz9QH1S2IWHNP9TisJOPm_i4yk5Zc&s=yfv5W4B4dW_rAFsJ15ZtYMrXT-h9lL5CEDEdvXLwziI&e=> Geographical Indication Protection in the United States United States Patent and Trademark Office - uspto.gov<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.uspto.gov_sites_def...> Geographical Indication Protection in the United States United States Patent and Trademark Office What Are “Geographical Indications”? “Geographical indications” (“GIs”) are defined at Article 22(1) of the World Trade www.uspto.gov<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.uspto.gov&d=DwMFaQ&c...> Rebecca Tushnet Frank Stanton Professor of First Amendment Law, Harvard Law School 703 593 6759 ________________________________ From: Michael Graham (ELCA) <migraham@expediagroup.com<mailto:migraham@expediagroup.com>> Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2019 8:31 PM To: Tushnet, Rebecca <rtushnet@law.harvard.edu<mailto:rtushnet@law.harvard.edu>>; claudio di gangi <ipcdigangi@gmail.com<mailto:ipcdigangi@gmail.com>>; Paul Tattersfield <gpmgroup@gmail.com<mailto:gpmgroup@gmail.com>> Cc: gnso-rpm-wg <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org>> Subject: RE: [GNSO-RPM-WG] Proposal re Q8. Wondering out loud whether GIs are necessarily “source identifiers”. My understanding is that they are identifiers of particular geographic locations, whereas trademarks are source identifiers. GIs may be source identifiers, but to the extent they are then they would be considered trademarks. So . . . am I missing something in the terminology? Michael R. [cid:image001.png@01D49D39.23E390C0] Michael R. Graham Senior Counsel and Global Director, Intellectual Property, Expedia Group T +1 425 679 4330 | M +1 425 241 1459 333 108th Ave. NE | Bellevue | WA 98004 Email: migraham@expediagroup.com<mailto:migraham@expediagroup.com> [cid:image002.png@01D49D39.23E390C0] From: GNSO-RPM-WG <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Tushnet, Rebecca Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2019 1:50 PM To: claudio di gangi <ipcdigangi@gmail.com<mailto:ipcdigangi@gmail.com>>; Paul Tattersfield <gpmgroup@gmail.com<mailto:gpmgroup@gmail.com>> Cc: gnso-rpm-wg <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [GNSO-RPM-WG] Proposal re Q8. From my perspective, the key problem is that "source identifier" describes, among other things, GIs. We can engage in special pleading against GIs and just carve them out, but I admit that leaves me a bit sour. I also would note that the relevant statutes I've seen don't use the words "source identifier" either, so we are still shuffling off the interpretive weight to Deloitte. (E.g., although the Red Cross also has TM registrations, the Red Cross US statute that has been mentioned in this discussion uses the word "use" to define one prohibited act, and "wears or displays ... for the fraudulent purpose of inducing the belief that he is a member of or an agent for the American National Red Cross" to define the other prohibited act.) For these reasons, I have come around to not wanting to add "source identifier" to the definition--I don't think it actually solves the problem and it might make things even less clear. Other than that, I do think we have gotten a lot closer. Rebecca Tushnet Frank Stanton Professor of First Amendment Law, Harvard Law School 703 593 6759 ________________________________ From: claudio di gangi <ipcdigangi@gmail.com<mailto:ipcdigangi@gmail.com>> Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2019 4:11 PM To: Paul Tattersfield <gpmgroup@gmail.com<mailto:gpmgroup@gmail.com>> Cc: Tushnet, Rebecca <rtushnet@law.harvard.edu<mailto:rtushnet@law.harvard.edu>>; gnso-rpm-wg <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [GNSO-RPM-WG] Proposal re Q8. Paul, I agree with you; and you have spotted one of the areas of divergence between my proposal and Rebecca's. My proposal includes alternative language on this provision - that I believe addresses your point, but I am interested in your perspective. Best regards, Claudio On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 4:00 PM Paul Tattersfield <gpmgroup@gmail.com<mailto:gpmgroup@gmail.com>> wrote: Rebecca, I believe in 3.2.3 you should not add the words "as trademarks" as the marks concerned are not trademarks. For example once such 6ter marks are communicated to the USPTO and are accepted it is not possible for any organization to register a trademark containing the mark and importantly that includes the originating entity itself. Instead an 89 serial is created so the mark turns up in an examining attorney’s search etc. Best regards, Paul On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 8:04 PM Tushnet, Rebecca <rtushnet@law.harvard.edu<mailto:rtushnet@law.harvard.edu>> wrote: This is the same text but with the subject line proper. Rebecca Tushnet Frank Stanton Professor of First Amendment Law, Harvard Law School 703 593 6759 _______________________________________________ GNSO-RPM-WG mailing list GNSO-RPM-WG@icann.org<mailto:GNSO-RPM-WG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_gnso-2Drpm-2Dwg&d=DwMFaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=zNkRTU6mF0Z0D3-x2yYFYqRN-laL_rrDxkm1t3nS1D0&s=sIWgLf6tJOr4bVrRl2Kq-iflUaAJ5xM7solSCPqTSEM&e=> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=zNkRTU6mF0Z0D3-x2yYFYqRN-laL_rrDxkm1t3nS1D0&s=ACGGg3oDhOg63w3gCmDwRhR4IOgKM68xVpS38jPW6Ek&e=>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=zNkRTU6mF0Z0D3-x2yYFYqRN-laL_rrDxkm1t3nS1D0&s=FFCUiGsakbAYTolDM5UiMxZBkB4wC55n8jDUnUzd3Uk&e=>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ GNSO-RPM-WG mailing list GNSO-RPM-WG@icann.org<mailto:GNSO-RPM-WG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_gnso-2Drpm-2Dwg&d=DwMFaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=zNkRTU6mF0Z0D3-x2yYFYqRN-laL_rrDxkm1t3nS1D0&s=sIWgLf6tJOr4bVrRl2Kq-iflUaAJ5xM7solSCPqTSEM&e=> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=zNkRTU6mF0Z0D3-x2yYFYqRN-laL_rrDxkm1t3nS1D0&s=ACGGg3oDhOg63w3gCmDwRhR4IOgKM68xVpS38jPW6Ek&e=>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=zNkRTU6mF0Z0D3-x2yYFYqRN-laL_rrDxkm1t3nS1D0&s=FFCUiGsakbAYTolDM5UiMxZBkB4wC55n8jDUnUzd3Uk&e=>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
