As it now stands, the “variations” service is available only during the “ongoing notice period” and not during the Trademark Claims Period (first 90 days of GA).  This suggests that an option to consider is putting the variations service into the Trademark Claims Period as well.  That would raise questions about whether the notice will go to the applicant during that period, and whether there should be any cost for the service during Trademark Claims.  Finally, this raises the question of how the specific variations available now from the TMCH stack up against the non-exact-match proposals.

Best regards,

Greg

On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 3:02 PM Paul Tattersfield <gpmgroup@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Phil,

Sorry for the less than clear reply earlier, not helpful. For non-exact match domain registrations an optional notification service is already available to mark holders so I was curious to know given the service is optional, was Michael aware of it before making his proposal? And if not would such a service go anyway to meeting his concerns? I was hoping it would because to issue TMCH notices to would-be registrants on every non-exact-match domain registration has the potential to cause a lot of unnecessary anxiety with well intentioned registrants while providing very little deterrent effect for persistent miscreants and especially so on shorter marks.

Best regards,


Paul


On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 6:12 PM Corwin, Philip <pcorwin@verisign.com> wrote:

Paul T:

 

To clarify, are you proposing that Claims Notices should continue to be generated only in response to prospective registrations of domains where the name is an exact match for a TMCH-registered mark, but that the TMCH notification service should be expanded to provide the mark holder with notice whenever a domain name that includes the exact match is registered?

 

Thanks, Philip

 

Philip S. Corwin

Policy Counsel

VeriSign, Inc.

12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190

703-948-4648/Direct

571-342-7489/Cell

 

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

 

From: GNSO-RPM-WG <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Paul Tattersfield
Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2019 12:27 PM
To: BECKHAM, Brian <brian.beckham@wipo.int>
Cc: gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [GNSO-RPM-WG] GNSO RPM-Trademark Claims Notice Sub Team -- Proposal for Submission and Apologies

 

Thanks for the link Brian, my question to Michael was really to see if the the issues for non-match domains could be met with jsut an email to the TM holder rather than a notice to every domain appliclicant with a TM substring in it.

 

On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 5:17 PM BECKHAM, Brian <brian.beckham@wipo.int> wrote:

Paul, and Paul,

 

This is already provided by the TMCH:

 

https://www.trademark-clearinghouse.com/content/ongoing-notifications

 

Brian

 

From: GNSO-RPM-WG <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Paul Keating
Sent: Thursday, May 9, 2019 12:47 PM
To: Paul Tattersfield <gpmgroup@gmail.com>
Cc: gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org
Subject: Re: [GNSO-RPM-WG] GNSO RPM-Trademark Claims Notice Sub Team -- Proposal for Submission and Apologies

 

Excellent idea Paul!

 

This is a service that the TMCH could easily implement.  It would then allow the trademark holder to deal with the issue in a responsible manner instead of having a knee-jerk and chilling email sent to the registrant.

 

Paul. Keating

 

From: Paul Tattersfield <gpmgroup@gmail.com>
Date: Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 1:48 AM
To: Paul Keating <Paul@law.es>
Cc: "Michael Graham (ELCA)" <migraham@expediagroup.com>, Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>, "gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [GNSO-RPM-WG] GNSO RPM-Trademark Claims Notice Sub Team -- Proposal for Submission and Apologies

 

Hi Michael,

Couple of quick questions


Wouldn't single letter marks generate a lot of notices especially an 'a' or 'e' ?

Would it be possible to just send a notfication email to the mark holder so they could remain informed of new registrations and be able to montior the new domains and thereby avoid the chilling effect of lots of TMCH notices to gwnuine registrants?

Best regards,

Paul.

 

On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 5:14 PM Paul Keating <Paul@law.es> wrote:

With all respect to Michael, I do not believe this proposal should be accepted at this time.

 

Questions 7 and 8 remain unanswered.  These are important threshold questions that the proponent should complete prior to submission.  Otherwise the work group is bogged down considering or perhaps even assisting in the development of basic rationale for the proposal.  This should be undertaken by the proponent.

 

Thus, here we have a proposal to significantly expand the scope of notification.  It would, for example, trigger a notice for Apple Computers if I wanted to register Pineapple. xyz or a trademark holder for “THE” if I wanted to register Theater.club or for Nike if I wanted to register Airplane.xyz

 

The proposal provides no evidence that would support the proposal (Question 7).

 

Nor does it reference any data reviewed by the Sub Team that show any need to address the issue (Question 8).

 

 

With a properly completed questionnaire this may become a legitimate request but it currently does not meet the requirements IMHO.

 

Paul Keating

 

From: GNSO-RPM-WG <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of "Michael Graham (ELCA) via GNSO-RPM-WG" <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org>
Reply-To: "Michael Graham (ELCA)" <migraham@expediagroup.com>
Date: Wednesday, May 8, 2019 at 5:40 PM
To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>, "gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org>
Subject: [GNSO-RPM-WG] GNSO RPM-Trademark Claims Notice Sub Team -- Proposal for Submission and Apologies

 

Unfortunately, I will not be able to attend the call today due to pressing business matters.  Because the schedule calls for discussion of answers and proposals regarding Question 4 regarding whether the Exact Match standard for sending Claims Notices should be extended, and I wish to resubmit my “Exact Match Plus” proposal for either the Sub Team’s approval or approval for placing before the community for Public Comment, I am attaching my proposal – which I have revised to the form for submission of proposals.  I have not completed the references to Evidence, and had hoped to do so in part today during our call.  I shall, however, complete this if granted time to do so before our next call.

 

Thank you all for your consideration and indulgence,

Michael R.

_______________________________________________ GNSO-RPM-WG mailing list GNSO-RPM-WG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg

_______________________________________________
GNSO-RPM-WG mailing list
GNSO-RPM-WG@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg

 

World Intellectual Property Organization Disclaimer: This electronic message may contain privileged, confidential and copyright protected information. If you have received this e-mail by mistake, please immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail and all its attachments. Please ensure all e-mail attachments are scanned for viruses prior to opening or using.

_______________________________________________
GNSO-RPM-WG mailing list
GNSO-RPM-WG@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg