Email forwarded on behalf of Lori Schulman

 

Dear All,

 

I am responding to Jason’s suggestion about continuing the discussion of recommendation 7.  I cannot make the RPM call on Tuesdays.  I was clear about that when the schedule changed. 

 

My response is as follows to the suggestion.

 

  1. My understanding is that issue closed out 2 weeks ago.  INTA not in favor of reopening the question.
  2. As the basis for reopening the question is the suggestion from INTA about access and accreditation, that suggestion was made in the event that the WG would have consensus on opening the TMCH.  As there was no consensus, INTA considers this moot.

 

The IPC leadership call competes with the WG call today.  Between my absence and the conflict with IPC call, I am asking for the WG to delay this item until at Thursday.  However, per the above, INTA’s position is that it’s suggestions regarding an open TMCH have become moot.

 

Thank you for your consideration and I apologize for the last minute nature of my request.

 

L.

 

With kind regards,

 

Lori S. Schulman

Senior Director, Internet Policy

International Trademark Association (INTA)

+1-202-704-0408, Skype:  LSSchulman

lschulman@inta.org, www.inta.org

 

Find us on:  Twitter [twitter.com]  Description: LinkedIn LinkedIn [linkedin.com]  Description: facebook-logo (2) Facebook [facebook.com]

 

 

 

 

From: GNSO-RPM-WG <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Michael Karanicolas <mkaranicolas@gmail.com>
Date: Monday, August 3, 2020 at 4:14 PM
To: gnso-rpm-wg <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org>
Subject: [GNSO-RPM-WG] TMCH Proposal 7

 

Hi all,

 

Further to our previous discussions, please see revised language for proposal #7, with the aim of addressing concerns associated with an open and searchable model, and in particular the need to mitigate the potential for misuse of information in the database:

 

ICANN should develop a limited system for reviewing TMCH records, accessible to a limited subset of certified applicants, such as intellectual property enforcement authorities, academic or civil society researchers, auditors, and other parties with a legitimate research interest in accessing information to affirm the functioning and scope of the TMCH. This includes searching for registrations which have subsequently deemed to be inadmissible to the TMCH database (i.e. geographic indicators), improper registrations, and general auditing of the functioning of the TMCH and the database used for sunrise and trademark claims notices. Access may be predicated on the fulfillment of particular requirements and safeguards to ensure that the information gathered is not used in a way which facilitates cybersquatting or other breaches of intellectual property rights, such as a written commitment to only use the information for permissible purposes.

 

Best,

Michael